Author: Jessie Yu

Friendships For the Mono- and Bi-Lingual College Student: Does The Language You Speak Make A Difference in How You Make Friends?

In the course of our research, we endeavored to examine the difference in the social life of UCLA college students, their capacity to make friends, and satisfy their need for social support with fellow students based on their status as a monolingual or bilingual speaker of English. Drawing on support from previous research dealing with different student populations, we concluded that the way bilingual students are treated and form communities is different from the way monolinguals do, whether because of “othering” by speakers who did not understand their language or culture or because they sought out connections with those who shared their ethnic or linguistic ties. It was almost universal in our interviews where bilingual speakers had a bias towards others who spoke their non-English language, and many of the monolinguals admitted to preferring the company of those who shared their language and culture. Not every speaker who our team interviewed had an exactly identical experience, however- none of our bilingual speakers derived from the same culture or spoke the same language- and there were a few interesting perspectives and outliers.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

In the course of their education, every single college student is faced with the point where they realize that they are now, effectively, adults and they are now- potentially for the first time- on their own. Many freshmen entering into university are inbound to a new city, a new county, new state, or even an entirely new country. The locale, culture, and people are all different than where they are originally from.

This gap in culture (and sometimes even language) and the responsibilities endowed by college life can make it difficult to make friends in a new place– but it is also extremely pivotal for mental and social well being to make social connections, given the loneliness of being far from home and isolation from the people one knows.

Researching into how students- particularly bilingual students- construct their new friendships is invaluable for anyone incoming to university. Using UCLA students as a representative example, we can explore some of the insights of students navigating their new social landscape. Most specifically, we want to see how- and if- monolinguals and bilinguals differ when it comes to trying to form friendships, and why.

Methods

We began our research on how bilinguals and monolinguals in college differ in making friends and their differing level of social satisfaction in the college environment by consulting various published literature on the subject, but intended to do our own interviews and surveys to see if anecdotal evidence matched the broader scientific findings. Across many different papers- from bilingual college students of Chinese or Latinx descent all the way to the bias of young monolinguals from 4 to 6 years of age- we found a fairly consistent trend: bilinguals liked grouping with other bilinguals (specifically ones of their own culture and language) and monolinguals tended a slight cognitive bias (conscious or otherwise) towards other grouping with monolinguals.

When we had seen the literature’s assessment of college friendships by bilinguals, we formed our hypothesis about the difference: that bilinguals tended to find it easier to make friends with bilinguals from their culture and that monolinguals tended either to “not care” or stick with monolinguals. We also sought out whether being bilingual was particularly helpful in making social connections compared to monolinguals, and other potential social benefits of bilingualism in a predominantly English-controlled American college environment. With our research question and secondary and tertiary objectives in mind, we put our theories and the broader literature to the test through qualitative and quantitative surveys and interviews.

Results

The results of the interviews with bilinguals were quite illustrative in relation to social connections through their first language. Using direct quotes from interviews, many of the answers were quite straightforward:

INTERVIEW 1 – BILINGUAL

I: Did you find it easier to connect and meet people who spoke the same language as you?

J: Yes, most definitely. Uhm, I really liked connecting with people who also spoke Vietnamese because there were a lot of like, you know, Vietnamese language jokes that only Vietnamese people would get.

INTERVIEW 2 – BILINGUAL

I: Have you found it easier to connect with people who speak the same language as you?

S: […] Definitely, yeah. It’s much easier. I mean, it really depends on the person. I wouldn’t say, “Oh, I’m going to go and make friends with whoever speaks Farsi”, because some people, it depends on how approachable they are or if I vibe with them. But in terms of, uh, having one thing to connect. Yes, I would say it’s much easier for me to connect to someone who speaks the same language versus non-Farsi.

INTERVIEW 3 – BILINGUAL

I: Do you find it easier to connect with people who speak the same language(s) as you?

E: Definitely, I feel like it’s easier if I can also speak your language and understand what I’m saying.

Very consistently across bilingual speakers that we interviewed, sharing a language and culture was essential for forming social ties. They expressed feeling at ease with people who spoke their own language, or how being among a bilingual speaker enhanced their experience more than it would be otherwise.

INTERVIEW 1 – MONOLINGUAL

I: Do you think language or culture has any bearing on who you choose to interact with in your day to day life?

A: Uhm, I definitely would say so… it’s easier for me to talk to or be around someone who has the same language and culture as me.

INTERVIEW 2 – MONOLINGUAL

I: Do you think language or culture has any bearing on who you choose to interact with in your day to day life?

J: […] It kinda sounds like an asshole thing to say– but I think that I’m accepting of a lot of different cultures and stuff– I think there are some subconscious elements, but I wouldn’t know what they were, there are probably some groups I don’t interact with just off of, I don’t know, vibes…

Monolinguals, in their parallel questions to the bilingual speakers, hedged a little when answering but definitely seemed to be likewise confident that they preferred to stay within their own clade of language and culture.

When it came to the respective groups, bilinguals occasionally went out of their way to specifically connect with their own cultures (the interviewee of Interview 1 professed to specifically looking for Southeast Asian clubs on campus in order to connect with others and make friends) but monolinguals had no such compunctions (no one we interviewed was, for instance, attending an “Born American Student” or “Monolingual English” club, nor did such a thing exist). When it came to making friendships, typically they went for shared hobbies unrelated to culture (in one case, gaming clubs).

This is not a zero sum game, however– in many cases, bilinguals at UCLA had the added benefit of being able to draw on their extra language in addition to monolingual strategies, meaning their opportunities for friendships were more diverse than the monolingual opportunities. Though the potential for exclusion from these more monolingual-oriented experiences is possible, rejection by monolingual speakers for language or culture was rare, if existent at all.

Many of the monolinguals we interviewed wished they had the opportunity to learn other languages and be fluent in them, viewing their English exclusion as a missed opportunity; only one subject of interview wanted to remain a monolingual, though when pressed admitted he would like to learn American Sign Language (and advocated that the rest of the US did, as well) and wasn’t sure if that counted as being multilingual. Broadly speaking in our interviews, bilinguals were happy to provide a social bridge for monolingual to monolingual interactions and delighted to get the chance to share their culture or language with others. No one regretted being bilingual or thought it made their social opportunities at UCLA worse.

Conclusion

A primary finding that stood out in our research was the absence of in-group/out-group biases within both groups. Instead, we found that linguistic diversity among the population created opportunities for cultural exchange and that in-group preferences did not completely discourage students from reaching out to other cultures. Our results revealed that bilingual students expressed stronger social ties to their cultural communities compared to their monolingual counterparts who conversely expressed a strong desire for second-language acquisition.

These findings led us to conclude that: (1) linguistic diversity can foster a positive school environment by providing opportunities for cultural exchange among different cultures, (2) in-group/out-group biases do not pose negative effects on social relationships among bilingual and monolingual students, (3) bilingualism and second-language acquisition can potentially enhance the social experience of students.

However, these findings are limited by several factors within our study. Firstly, our population of study is representative of a unique environment with a relatively higher proportion of politically liberal, ethnically diverse students than the average American university. Our research is also limited to the study of English-speaking students, restricting our data from being representative of environments with speakers of different dominant languages. Given these limitations, we believe that linguistic diversity thrives most successfully in diverse environments wherein cultural exchange is a social norm and speakers are collectively open-minded to learning

We believe that our findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the importance of second-language acquisition in childhood development to enhance social connections in adulthood and potential positive effects of bilingualism in combating cultural differences in diverse settings. Furthermore, these findings highlight the importance of language knowledge of one’s own culture in strengthening community ties and individual identity. We believe that future research in bilingual and monolingual differences should focus on studying the potential positive effects of second-language acquisition on social skills, educational development, and in overcoming cultural differences.

References

Byers‐Heinlein, K., Behrend, D. A., Said, L. M., Girgis, H., & Poulin‐Dubois, D. (2016). Monolingual and bilingual children’s social preferences for monolingual and bilingual speakers. Developmental Science, 20(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12392

Toppelberg, C. O., & Collins, B. A. (2010). Language, culture, and adaptation in immigrant children. Child and adolescent psychiatric clinics of North America, 19(4), 697–717. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chc.2010.07.003

Wang, L., Gonzalez, P. D., Lau, P. L., Vaughan, E. L., & Costa, M. F. (2023). “Dando gracias”: Gratitude, social connectedness, and subjective happiness among bilingual Latinx college students. Journal of Latinx Psychology, 11(3), 203-219. https://doi.org/10.1037/lat0000227

Sebanc, A. M., Hernandez, M. D., & Alvarado, M. (2009). Understanding, Connection, and Identification: Friendship Features of Bilingual Spanish-English Speaking Undergraduates. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24(2), 194-217. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558408329953

Xu, C. L. (2022). Portraying the ‘Chinese international students’: a review of English-language and Chinese-language literature on Chinese international students (2015–2020). Asia Pacific Education Review, 23(1), 151–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12564-021-09731-8

[/expander_maker]

Formality in the UCLA Community: Communication and Self-Expression in the Digital Age

Online communication has undoubtedly brought on more opportunities for misunderstanding. However, the use of linguistic elements such as internet slang and emojis represent the myriad ways that humans expand our linguistic toolbox. Through our research, collected through online surveys and interviews with several members of the UCLA community, we found that formality is shaped by many complex factors, including similarity or difference in age, gender, and power dynamics between interlocutors. The prevalence of concepts such as mirroring suggests that maintaining appropriate levels of formality in these evolving communication mediums is an intuitive process which calls upon participants to be more attentive and creative communicators. Additionally, we found that these processes reveal that, although traditional notions of formality and politeness continue to shape our ways of interacting, the very definitions of these concepts are ever-changing.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

The rapid evolution of virtual communication technology is changing the way language is used, allowing interlocutors to use a vast range of tools such as visual elements and online slang, changing the way we come to know language. This results in the creation of a new set of language practices specific to online interactions. Naomi Baron delves into the pervasive influence of digital communication has led to a shift in language structure from traditional, standardized language to one that is more fluid and de-standardized (Baron, 2012), which is what we are aiming to look at. In our research, we investigate the nuances of formality and politeness through surveys and interviews with members of the UCLA community, allowing them to explain the nuances of their own communication habits – calling into question how concepts of formality and politeness may change over time.

Kadar and Mills discuss this in their work where they delve into politeness theory; culture is sometimes treated as rigid rules, potentially portraying individuals as passive recipients. The alternative perspective views culture as “embodied practices,” emphasizing the dynamic manifestations in individuals’ daily lives. (Kader & Mills, 2011.) We seek to understand how UCLA students navigate the world of virtual communication in an academic setting. Furthermore, we aim to gain a stronger grasp on our focus group’s subjective views regarding notions of formality and politeness. Our hypothesis suggests that UCLA students adopt more formal language when communicating with authority figures, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. This implies a tendency to avoid informal tools like slang or emojis. Despite evolving social norms, traditional notions of formality and politeness continue to influence how students speak.

Our focus group, members of the UCLA community, depend heavily on digital mediums for most interactions. When it comes to messaging, emails, and social media, students’ attitudes toward formality have a large impact on their interactions. In essence, our research looks at the variety of linguistic behaviors at UCLA, the opportunities and challenges presented by digital communication, and the effects these may have on academic connections and social relationships.

Methods

We employed a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to gather data across the diverse sprawl of the UCLA community. This included participants ranging from professors and students to teaching assistants and other faculty members. The data collection process was executed through in-person interviews as well as a Google Form Survey. Our dataset consisted of 10 in-person interviews and 42 survey responses, providing a comprehensive basis for an in-depth analysis of participant responses.

The in-person interviews were approximately 15-30 minutes, while the 8-question survey was designed with efficient qualitative analysis in mind. Furthermore, the in-person interviews consisted of open-ended queries addressing a range of themes related to informal vs. formal communication and touched on aspects including abbreviations, emojis, non-verbal cues, body language, tone, familiarity, time sensitivity, and slang. The online survey consisted of predetermined response options, whereas the interviews were designed to facilitate open responses. After data collection, interview transcriptions were analyzed to identify patterns of similarity and difference between the interviews and the survey responses.

Throughout the data acquisition phase, our project encountered a few challenges. One notable limitation: our data exclusively relied on self-reported behaviors, perhaps resulting in a lack of impartiality that an observation-based method, such as conversational analysis, may have provided. (Meredith, 2020.) Moreover, the authenticity of responses generated from both interviews and the survey responses were contingent upon the honesty of the interviewee or respondent. However, the online survey was anonymous, which may have generated more genuine results from the respondents, as the perceived risk of judgment is mitigated. Lastly, the data was thoroughly analyzed to identify patterns of evidence that would either support or deny our hypothesis.

Results and Analysis

The findings suggest that in most forms of communication, people tend to mirror the habits of those they interact with. There was a tendency to adapt levels of formality based on context, such as being more formal in professional or educational settings, and less formal in casual conversations or on social media. This was also influenced by the medium of communication as well as the relationship with the individual, with more formal language used in emails and with superiors, while informal language is reserved for friends or family. Many interviewees stated that they often “mirror,” or match the communication style of the person they are addressing. This could involve adopting similar speech patterns, gestures, or even body language. Furthermore, “matching energy” involves adjusting one’s approach, such as using emojis or punctuation, to align with the other person’s formality level.

Emojis and abbreviations are more common in informal settings and less in professional contexts. Frequency of communication and level of familiarity also influence language choice, with increased informal language aligning with an increase in familiarity. Our findings suggest that non-verbal cues such as body language and eye contact allow for easier communication because they create a “live feedback loop,” a term used by several interviewees. A “live feedback loop” occurs when one concentrates on another’s non-verbal cues during an interaction as a signal for understanding their unspoken thoughts and general disposition. This represents a certain level of intuitiveness and a strong attention to detail. In online communication, where non-verbal cues are absent, looking for these cues in word choice. Individuals tend to carefully proofread emails, especially those addressed to professors. In time-sensitive scenarios, certain interviewees default to casual language, while others prefer formal expressions. Additionally, the flexibility to switch between formal and informal language within the same conversation is deemed appropriate depending on the context and relationship with the interlocutor.

We hypothesized that UCLA students adjust the formality of their linguistic patterns when interacting with individuals of superior authority, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. Our findings indicated that people tend to mirror the communication habits of those they engage with, adjusting their level of formality based on context and relationship dynamics. In professional or educational settings, where a higher degree of formality is expected, individuals typically employ formal language. In casual conversations or on social media, a more relaxed tone is used. The utilization of emojis and abbreviations, common in informal settings, diminishes in professional contexts, reflecting the hypothesis that normative ideas of formality continue to influence linguistic behaviors.

Figure 1: Responses to survey question “Do you think abbreviations impact the formality of a message?”
Figure 2: Responses to survey question: “With whom would you feel most comfortable using emojis?”

Conclusion

In conclusion, our research on the formality of linguistic patterns in virtual communication among UCLA students and faculty reveals that individuals adapt their language based on the context, medium, and relationship with the interlocutor. The findings confirm our hypothesis that students increase the formality of their linguistic patterns when communicating with authority figures, such as older individuals or those in higher positions. Emojis and abbreviations, common in informal settings, are used less frequently in professional contexts, indicating a clear distinction in language use based on the perceived formality of the situation. The concept of a “live feedback loop” in face-to-face interactions aids in understanding and adjusting communication, a feature lacking in online exchanges, where careful word choice and proofreading become essential.

Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the dynamics of virtual communication among UCLA students, emphasizing the influence of formality and politeness in linguistic patterns. Furthermore, our results reveal the delicate cooperation and reciprocity which online communication demands from its participants. Future studies could explore the impact of cultural differences on communication styles and the evolving nature of language in the digital age.

References

Baron, Naomi S., (2012). The impact of electronically-mediated communication on language standards and style’, in Terttu Nevalainen, and Elizabeth Closs Traugott (eds), The Oxford Handbook of the History of English, Oxford Academic, 6

Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Bou-Franch, P. (2013). A Cross-Cultural Investigation of Email Communication in Peninsular Spanish and British English: The Role of (In)Formality and (In)Directness. Pragmatics and Society, 4(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.4.1.01lor

Kádár, D. Z., & Mills, S. (2011). Politeness in East Asia: Chapter 2, “Politeness and culture” Cambridge University Press

O’Reilly-Shah, V. N., Lynde, G. C., & Jabaley, C. S. (2018). Is it time to start using the emoji in biomedical literature? BMJ: British Medical Journal, 363. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26964183

Meredith, Joanne. (2020). Conversation analysis, cyberpsychology, and online interaction. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, Volume 14, Issue 5.

[/expander_maker]

Cultural Identity Maintained Through Code-switching among Immigrant Generations in a Dominant English Country

The United States is often hailed as a country of immigrants, but in reality there are complex social and cultural factors which play a role in the U.S. immigrant experience, one of the greatest being language. While the U.S. has no official language, English is the predominant means of communication, and plays a large role in multi-generational communications of immigrant communities. Our research seeks to answer: how does code-switching between English and native languages influence identity formation and social interactions among different generations within immigrant communities? Through participant observation and interviews at Los Angeles Latino and Chinese American church communities, we found that first-generation immigrants code-switch more often in work and public environments, whereas second-generation immigrants code-switch for the sake of multi-generation communication. Overall, we demonstrate that through code-switching, immigrant families and subsequent generations struggle to balance assimilation into American culture and the ability to preserve their cultural identity.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction and Background

According to Pew Research (2020), “more than 1 million immigrants arrive in the U.S. each year.” With the arrival of various ethnic groups to the United States, and integrating themselves into American culture, new cultural exchanges emerge. Nevertheless, discrimination against migrants persists, hindering their integration and sense of belonging. Consequently, migrants often assimilate into the dominant hegemonic groups’ culture – rejecting their own.

Because of the ongoing presence of discrimination, it is crucial to understand the impact of dominant ideologies on both first-generation migrant communities and subsequent generations.

Language plays a key role in identity formation, with immigrants often teaching their children their native languages to maintain cultural ties. However, pressures to adapt to the dominant culture often lead parents to prioritize English as a first language. So how does learning your native language influence your identity and that of your children amidst a society that prioritizes English as the official language? Multiple studies have focused on code-switching as a form of expressing cultural identity (Bosire 2006). According to Myers-Scotton (1993), code-switching is defined as the mixing of different codes (or languages) by speakers in the same conversation (video explanation on code-switching). Moreover, scholars have also highlighted code-switching as a form of learning (Kremin et al. 2022) and socializing (Wei 1995; Lee 2019). Yet, Rangel et al. (2015) have critically emphasized the amount of stigmatization code-switching continues to receive. For this reason, our research focused on code-switching among immigrant communities in the United States, particularly focusing on the contrasts and similarities between first-generation and subsequent generations of immigrants. This study contributes to the wider discussion of code-switching as we explain from a sociolinguistic perspective how migrants and subsequent generations express their identity in a country where non-standard languages are viewed as inferior to standard English. Through qualitative methods, this research answers the following questions: how does code-switching between English and native languages influence identity formation and social interactions among different generations within immigrant communities? Our findings show that through code-switching, immigrant families and subsequent generations struggle to balance assimilation into American culture and the ability to preserve their cultural identity.

Methods

We collected data from two different churches in the Los Angeles area, with participants from Chinese and Latino/a descent communities. We used both participant-observation and semi-structured interview methods. The former was to note how speakers interacted in public spaces, specifically those that are similar in purpose. The latter was to hear the opinions of our participants about their language use.

Our observations took place in group settings, during which we took notes on verbal and non-verbal interactions between three groups: first-generation, second-generation, and a mixed group of both. We chose to limit the time of our observations to 15-25 minutes (due to assignment and situational constraints). In interviews, we spoke to two first-generation parents from each ethnic demographic (Latino or Chinese), ranging from middle-aged to older adults, and with one of each of their (second-generation) children, ranging from young to regular adults.

After data collection, we first compared answers within the most specific group, for example, responses from first-generation Latinos or from second-generation Chinese Americans. Then, we compared the data between generations within the same immigrant group (e.g. responses from Latinos), and the same generation between immigrant groups (e.g. second-generation responses). These were chosen as the methods for analysis because they forced us to consider all possible nuances between the various groups and once we had data for a set of the smaller groups (same generation & ethnicity) we could accurately compare the data for the larger groups (ethnic vs generational).

Results

Figure 1: Comparing code-switching experiences between first-generation immigrants and second-generation immigrants

The table illustrates the comparison between first-generation immigrants and second-generation immigrants. We observed various factors of code-switching between both generations and discovered that there is a major difference in the context of code-switching. First-gen has been found to code-switch more often and will code-switch in the context of their root community’s events or situations that require using English. On the other hand, second-gen has been found to code-switch less in general. Code-switching behavior only occurs when they are speaking to people whose first choice of language is Spanish or native Spanish speakers.

Discussion and Conclusions

In conclusion, our findings touch on the importance of language use and perspectives from the first and second generations, particularly with an emphasis on the role played by code-switching among the groups. This research seeks to delve into the effect that code-switching brings in the process of identity formation and socialization of immigrant families and the generations. Therefore, it looks deeper into individual experiences and perspectives to understand the complex position this language takes in this domain. However, language behaviors observed among first and second-generation immigrants more than confirm that code-switching is the most effective tool through which to fully understand the subtleties of bilingualism and acculturation.

First-generation immigrants are struggling to learn and use English in respect to their native languages, and this shows a conscious choice to balance between assimilation and retention of culture. This has been seen in situations where some people never saw English as very important compared to their mother tongue; and that has also seemed to be the area of difficulty in integration, but to them, it’s an area of great importance. For code-switching of second-generation immigrants, it shows some ways that language influences identity and integration with society. These show movement away from an identification with American culture and toward the linguistic assimilation of their parent-native languages. Others maintain strong ties to their cultural heritage by being bilingual. They illustrate perfectly how family and personal language attitudes condition one’s approach to code-switching as a means of bicultural identity navigation. This approach further infiltrates the appreciation of code-switching as a changing and context-bound practice that reflects the challenges and opportunities presented to immigrant communities in maintaining their linguistic heritage in another environment. In this dimension, it calls for comprehensive recognition of multifarious language roles within the experience of migration. We also must observe the aspect of functionality and symbolism, and ultimately, consider the wider implications for the number of cultural identity, social integration, and intergenerational shifts.

While the researchers question the negative stamp of code-switching and non-standard language use, rather, it encourages a broader acceptance of bilingualism, or on a higher level, even of multilingualism, that respects the differences in the use of languages. This work was undertaken in order to remove the stigma from practicing code-switching, keeping in view the positive aspects of bilingualism, which pertains to strengthened cultural ties and increased flexibility of personalities. Overall, our research offers new and interesting data, bringing relevant insights and contributions to research in sociolinguistics on code-switching among immigrants. Through empirical evidence we have shown how practices of identity, cultural preservation, and adaptation intertwine with language practices. This highlights how complex the nature of language used among immigrant communities is and does provide a window into socio-cultural forces which are at play on code-switching and bilingualism. This serves to open further investigations into the complexity of the relations between language, identity, and community in diverse sociolinguistic contexts.

References

Bosire, M. (2006). Immigrant Identity: Code Switching among Kenyans in Upstate New York. In Selected Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference on African Linguistics, ed. John Mugane et al., 44-52. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.

Budiman, A. (2020, August 20). Key findings about U.S. immigrants. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/08/20/key-findings-about-u-s-immigrants/.

Cher. L. L., (2019). Filling gaps or code choice? Code-switching across generations in colloquial Singapore Mandarin. Global Chinese 2019; 5(1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1515/glochi-2019-0001

Kremin, L. V., Alves, J., Orena, A. J., Polka, L., & Byers-Heinlein, K. (2022). Code-switching in parents’ everyday speech to bilingual infants. Journal of Child Language, 49(4), 714–740. doi:10.1017/S0305000921000118

Rangel, Natalie., Loureiro-Rodriguez, Veronica., & Moyona, Maria Irene. (2015). “Is that what I sound like when I speak?”: Attitudes towards Spanish, English, and code-switching in two Texas border towns. Spanish in Context, 12(2), 177-198. https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.12.2.01ran

Wei, Li. (1995). Code‐switching, preference marking and politeness in bilingual cross‐generational talk: Examples from a Chinese community in Britain. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development,16(3), 197-214, https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.1995.9994600

 [/expander_maker]

Celebrities and Controversies: What Works and What Doesn’t in Apology Videos

In today’s high society of “cancel culture,” apologizing has become a language that has diversified. This study dives deep into the world of online apologies, exploring how the majority of our influential figures today, celebrities, use language in public apology videos to mend what’s been broken and rebuild trust with their audience. The emotions, words, and actions can all seem like an act crafted for the cameras. Through the analysis of 15 apology videos, we navigate the comments and perceptions made in the landscape of the online audience to decide whether a public apology is genuine or insincere. Using digital ethnography and discourse analysis to give us insight into solving this issue, we translate the visual and verbal cues that aren’t in the spotlight – the tone, the gestures, and the choice of words, which shape the perceptions of authenticity. But it’s not just about dissecting these apologies. We also evoke what characteristics make for a genuine apology– the unscripted words, raw emotions, and simple background. By differentiating successful apologies from those that were unsuccessful, we reveal candor in the meaning of language that is displayed in front of a public audience. Beyond what the surface entails, we explore the morality behind celebrity apologies. They can be a mirror reflecting societal values, fluctuations in power, and the road to redemption. This research is not for mere insight, but also offers a deeper understanding of what it truly is like behind the screens in this digital age. There is much power in how we express ourselves; dictating how we shape relationships, rebuild trust, and craft a shared narrative.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

Growing up, we are taught from a very young age that an apology consists of the words, “I’m sorry.” Is that all it takes as we grow up? In society today, apologies have become very normalized and with the rise of social media in place, it appears highly important to delve into the study of online public apologies by influential people, focusing on the linguistic features chosen to elicit successful apologies throughout crisis communication (Loisa, 2021). As social influencers carry much power, it is important to hold them accountable for their wrongdoings and not allow them to manipulate the public into thinking that something is okay when it is not. Through analysis, we found that sincerity and genuineness are key to carrying out a successful apology video. By having a good understanding of linguistics and the different meanings certain words and phrases obtain, we analyzed the linguistic repair strategies influencers use when creating online apology videos, validating a successful apology or a manipulative one. Through our analysis, our main concern focused on the language strategies used by content creators and celebrities in apology videos to convey sincerity and repair their image. On the contrary, we also focused on why some apology videos completely flop and are seen as manipulated tactics to convey an insincere apology.

Methods

To better understand apology videos, we decided to watch some of them. We selected 15 apology videos from a selection of prominent celebrities and content creators with over 1 million subscribers on YouTube at the time of their controversy (some lost subscribers due to their controversies and are now below 1 million subscribers as a result). We chose creator apologies resulting from major controversies that had an impact on both fans and people outside of their fan community. Critical to our study was selecting videos with varied audience responses, including, positive, negative, and mixed responses in order to gauge which strategies led to successful apologies and which ones didn’t.

Figure 1: Logan Paul’s widely-viewed and controversial apology for filming a dead body, complete with a YouTube interface, including views, likes (👍), and comments.

We fully submerged ourselves in the virtual worlds where these apologies occurred in order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the surrounding context. Our digital ethnography involved analyzing the situations that necessitated an apology and the characteristics of the individuals giving the apology. We performed discourse analysis on spoken and unspoken communication in the films, assessing elements such as intonation, physical gestures, and vocabulary selection. To comprehend audience responses, we meticulously observed the comments that garnered the highest number of likes as an indicator of public sentiment, noting which strategies succeeded or fell flat. The inquiry did not focus on the more technical parts of discourse analysis, such as specific language frameworks and computer methods, which have been covered well in previous studies (Sandlin and Gracyalny, 2018). Our analysis, however, concentrated on overarching themes and tactics deemed significant in determining perceptions of sincerity and the effectiveness of apologies.

Results

Our research yielded a variety of results on the nature of apology videos and the success or lack thereof of various apology strategies. We noted the development of a unique speech register in apology videos, something that has been expounded upon previously (Choi, 2021). Similar filming choices emerge, including directly facing the camera from the shoulders or neck up, maintaining a plain personal appearance, and setting the video in a lightly colored, simple, domestic room. Despite an uncomplicated backdrop and a lack of extravagant accessories being intended to index sincerity, we found that these decisions had no real effect on the apology’s perception.

We found three major strategies: apologizing, refuting the need to apologize and defending oneself, and apologizing while defending and minimizing one’s actions. Genuine apologies with the use of the word “Sorry” and assumption of responsibility or well-evidenced, thorough rebuttals of accusations were well-received, but poorly-evidenced or incomplete rebuttals were criticized. Fans want natural speech with an unscripted tone, criticizing apologies they perceive as stilted or relying on a script, but still want meticulous, well-thought-out responses, while also wanting concise apologies that allow anyone to grasp the core message without delving extensively into the subject matter, a high and somewhat contradictory standard. Musical apologies like Colleen Ballinger’s ukulele song apology or Sienna Mae’s interpretive dance apology were seen as bizarre and inappropriate, especially in response to accusations of grooming minors and sexual assault respectively. Sympathy-baiting distractions, like TmarTn doing baby-talk to his dog in his apology, were also heavily criticized.

Figure 2: Successful and unsuccessful characteristics of apology videos.

Gaming and commentary YouTuber PewDiePie’s apology gives us an example of some strategies being successfully employed. In his succinctly titled “My Response”, PewDiePie was praised for directly apologizing and not excusing his behavior. His acknowledgment of his status as a role model and influential figure and his need to be better, particularly due to his other recent controversies, were appreciated by fans.

Figure 3: PewDiePie’s apology, which was praised for its simplicity and direct admittance of his mistake and apology.

PewDiePie’s apology was favorably compared to later apology videos, particularly for its lack of forced emotion or other forms of sympathy-baiting. Fans derived sincerity from a lack of attempted markers of sincerity, feeling like they were not being tricked but allowed to judge only the content of the apology.

 

 

 

Figure 4: Responses to PewDiePie’s apology video. He was praised for directly and succinctly owning up to his mistake and his lack of excuses.

In contrast, hip-hop artist Travis Scott’s apology video gives us an example of how an apology video and its strategies can backfire. Scott was mocked for his “over-dramatic” black-and-white filter, along with the frequency with which he rubbed his face. While his frequent blinking and facial rubbing could indicate crying and remorse, viewers noted his lack of tears or an actual “I’m sorry”. It is advisable to maintain an emotional equilibrium, effectively conveying genuine emotion appropriate for the video without being excessive or appearing to force it for sympathy.

 

Figure 5: A screenshot from Travis Scott’s widely lambasted apology video as posted on Instagram, including the infamous black-and-white filter and forehead rubbing.

His lack of concern and failure to stop his concert while his fans were being crushed to death in the crowd contrasted with this sudden change of heart two days later seemed dishonest. Scott’s apology was widely labeled as disingenuous, something advised by lawyers or publicists to shore up his image while refusing to actually accept responsibility for legal reasons.


Figure 6: Responses to Travis Scott’s apology video. His frequent head rubbing and emotionality were widely seen as markers of insincerity, and his stilted delivery and lack of an actual acknowledgment of responsibility were considered to reveal the video’s motivations as insincere.

When actions that typically index sincerity seem forced or incongruent with the context of the apology, it becomes a target for accusations of insincerity and dishonesty, which can be crippling to any apology (Hope, 2019). It is not enough to perform actions and apology video tropes that might be perceived to index sincerity (e.g. a plain appearance, emotionality); the content and tone of the apology and their appropriateness in relation to the inciting event are more important. While some strategies are more successful than others, how they are used is most important.

Discussion and Conclusions

Studying celebrity public apologies is essential for understanding how individuals in the public eye navigate accountability and redemption. These apologies offer valuable insights into the complex strategies of communication and public relations. We can gain a better understanding of celebrities’ relationships with their fans and what each party feels they owe each other through apologies and celebrities’ motivations for apologizing (Matheson, 2023). Language, tone, and framing play pivotal roles in shaping public perception and reception of these apologies. Celebrities employ linguistic devices to manage their image and reputation, illustrating the significant impact of language on social influence. Moreover, celebrity apologies serve as cultural artifacts, reflecting broader societal values and norms. Analyzing these apologies unveils the nuanced dynamics between language, culture, and public opinion. They provide a lens through which we can explore themes such as ethics, power dynamics, and identity. Furthermore, studying celebrity apologies offers insights into psychological processes like guilt, remorse, and forgiveness. Language becomes a medium through which individuals convey sincerity, empathy, or deflect responsibility. By dissecting these linguistic choices, we gain a deeper understanding of human behavior and interpersonal dynamics. In essence, celebrity apologies serve as rich sources for examining the intersection of language, culture, psychology, and social influence. They highlight the intricate ways in which language shapes and reflects our understanding of accountability, redemption, and societal values.

Related resources:

References

Battistella, Edwin L. Sorry about That: The Language of Public Apology / Edwin L. Battistella. Oxford University Press, 2014.

Choi, G. Y., & Mitchell, A. M. (2022). So sorry, now please watch: Identifying image repair strategies, sincerity and forgiveness in Youtubers’ apology videos. Public Relations Review, 48(4), 102226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102226

Croley, MacKenzie. “A Linguistic View of a Twitter Apology.” Journal of Student Research (Houston, Tex.), vol. 10, no. 2, 2021, https://doi.org/10.47611/jsr.v10i2.1230.

Hope, Jessamyn. “Seven Steps to a Successful Apology.” The Hopkins Review, vol. 12, no. 1, 2019, pp. 60–80, https://doi.org/10.1353/thr.2019.0007.

Loisa, J. (2021).” I’m just letting everyone know that I’m an idiot”: Apology Strategies in YouTubers’ Apology Videos (Master’s thesis, Itä-Suomen yliopisto).

Matheson, Benjamin. “Fame and Redemption: On the Moral Dangers of Celebrity Apologies.” Journal of Social Philosophy, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1111/josp.12510.

Sandlin, J. K., & Gracyalny, M. L. (2018). Seeking sincerity, finding forgiveness: YouTube apologies as Image Repair. Public Relations Review, 44(3), 393–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.04.007

[/expander_maker]

Gendered Language Word Perception: On the Primary Language Acquisition in Los Angeles Adolescents

Lily Eun, Maya Gibson-Ott, Desirae Barrios, Katherine Sandoval 

The Theory of Language Relativity suggests that an individual’s primary language shapes their perceptions and worldviews. Our research dives into how a gendered language like Spanish can affect object perception. The research focused on Spanish-speaking university students in Southern California; through surveys and interviews, the research illustrates how native Spanish speakers will assign gender to English words. Our research also included monolingual English-speaking participants as ‘control’ participants and native English speakers who were also bilingual in Spanish; this allowed our researchers to examine the patterns between bilingual and monolingual participants. Our findings illustrate that native Spanish speakers will assign genders to English words based on their Spanish equivalents; these findings indicate that primary languages have a strong linguistic influence on an individual’s perception regardless of their environment’s language. Our results highlight the importance bilingual assessments could have in the educational field. Accurately gauging students’ true intellect and advocating for inclusive language practices in fundamental education will be beneficial for educators to better provide the necessary resources to aid in a bilingual child’s learning. Our study highlights the implications of cross-cultural communication and the necessity of a change of assessment to be more linguistically sensitive for bilingual students.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Background

The Theory of Language Relativity is crucial to better understand human behaviors and the impacts of these behaviors in the educational world. This theory, also known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, claims that the structure of an individual’s primary language changes their worldview and shapes their perceptions. This hypothesis indicates that language is not just a tool of communication but has a deeper connection to an individual’s cognitive processor. And because many individuals residing in Southern California spoke Spanish before they spoke English (Los Angeles Almanac), our research team wanted to explore how a gendered language, such as Spanish, could impact individuals’ perception of gender regarding ‘genderless’ objects. Would our participants inadvertently allot gender connotations even while speaking a genderless language—English? Our field of research has been explored by Meria Sera, a University of Minnesota professor, who found that Spanish—being a gendered language—does influence a Spanish-speaking individual’s perception (Sera 1994). Building on this, we sought to investigate whether Spanish speakers, when questioned in English about the gender of objects, would replicate Sera’s findings regardless that the questions would be in their secondary language. In the educational world, students, whose primary language is Spanish, are required to participate in all placement exams in English only. Our research aims to provide proof as to why having bilingual evaluations in fundamental grade levels is crucial to better evaluating a child’s perception of the world.

Methods

Our research observed and analyzed word choice and gender narratives. In order to expand on the implications of the process of gendering words, we surveyed over a hundred people, the majority of them being undergraduate college students. This survey showed the participants various words, for example, “dress” and asked them to determine if the word was feminine, masculine, or neither. We categorized our participants into different sections, group A who only spoke English, group B who spoke English and learned Spanish as a second language, and group C who spoke Spanish as their first language and English as their second language. Once our initial results were collected, any students interested in additional interviews were contacted a week later and they were asked to repeat the word categorization process. Our team identified any changes in answers and attempted to determine patterns in responses among Native Spanish speakers and English speakers. Furthermore, interviewees were asked to list synonyms or adjectives of a particular word, and we then had the participants categorize those words as being feminine, masculine, or neither. Our goal was to analyze whether or not the perceived gender of words consistently agreed with each other.

Take the Survey for Yourself!

Results

Figure 1: Spanish speakers’ perceived gender of the word “language”

Our results show that native Spanish speakers will indeed gender English words to match the gender of the Spanish counterparts. In our 19 responses from participants who were Native Spanish Speakers, 50% of the responses to the English words were perceived to be the same gender as the gender of the word translated into Spanish. For example, when we asked our participants to identify the gender of the English word “language,” 57.9% of native Spanish speakers identified the word as Masculine. The word “language” in Spanish translates to “el idioma,” which is masculine in gender. During our post-survey interviews, a participant discussed that it felt “more natural” to choose the respective genders, and it had not registered to them that their choices aligned with the gender of the Spanish counterpart until our follow-up interview. When we analyzed the Native English speakers who only spoke English, we found that the participants were comparatively more likely to neutralize the gender of the English words. However, Native English speakers who were conversationally fluent in Spanish showed the greatest percentage of neutralizing the gender of English words. When analyzing Native Spanish speakers and Native English speakers, our results concluded that the more fluent and culturally connected the speaker was to Spanish culture, the more likely they would be to gender English words that do not explicitly show natural gender. Additionally, in explaining why speakers both fluent in Spanish and English chose to neutralize the words, we predicted that someone’s linguistic patterns would be subconsciously integrated to match the American culture that they live and are exposed to on a daily basis.

Figure 2: Native English speakers’ perceived gender of the words “day” and “language”

Discussion

Figure 3: Rates of perceived gender in various words among native Spanish speakers
Figure 4: Rates of perceived gender in various words among native English speakers

The findings in our research show evidence as to why schools should offer bilingual evaluations to youth in the LA area instead of English. Our findings indicate that our native language affects how we think about and perceive the world. Because language alters our reality, we cannot accurately evaluate one’s intelligence level in a language separate from their native tongue. To do so is unfair and a poor representation of intellect. Such evaluations lack the ability to understand the students’ nuances of the world, and, as a result, often serve as an obstacle preventing students from pursuing a higher education. By offering bilingual evaluations to youth in the Los Angeles area we gain a more holistic view of the student’s true intelligence level; by offering these bilingual evaluations fundamental education will better provide educators with the resources they need to work alongside their bilingual students.

The implementation of our research on the gendering of words across English and Spanish may most notably have a distinguishable impact on educators and curriculum developers. Understanding how grammatical gender can influence perception and interpretation—in languages such as Spanish—can provide valuable perspective on cross-cultural communication and can foster greater empathy and inclusivity throughout foundational education discourses.

Language learners may also benefit from recognizing that the way they gender an object or word can be perceived as relating to an opposite gender when speaking in another language. Because language has a fundamental impact on perception, culture, and community, organizations may benefit from incorporating inclusive language and receiving input from individuals of different backgrounds.

References

Geeslin, K. L. (2018). The Handbook of Spanish Second Language Acquisition. Hoboken, Nj: Wiley Blackwell.

Hispanics/Latinos in Los Angeles County – By the Numbers. (n.d.). Retrieved February 16, 2024, from www.laalmanac.com website: https://www.laalmanac.com/population/po722.php#:~:text=3.6%20million

Montrul, S., Foote, R., & Perpiñán, S. (2008). Gender Agreement in Adult Second Language Learners and Spanish Heritage Speakers: The Effects of Age and Context of Acquisition. Language Learning, 58(3), 503–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00449.x

Nissen, U. K. (2002, June). Aspects of translating gender. ResearchGate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/26402383_Aspects_of_translating_gender

Pérez-Pereira, M. (1991). The acquisition of gender: what Spanish children tell us. Journal of Child Language, 18(3), 571–590. doi:10.1017/S0305000900011259

Sera, M. D., Berge, C. A., & del Castillo Pintado, J. (1994). Grammatical and conceptual forces in the attribution of gender by English and Spanish speakers. Cognitive development, 9(3), 261-292.

[/expander_maker]

The Linguistic Switcheroo: Navigating Style-Shifts in College Discourse

Dead Poets Society (1989)

This blog entry explores the dynamic world of language use among college students at UCLA, focusing on how they adjust their linguistic style in academic environments. We delve into the phenomenon of style-switching, where students navigate between informal conversations with peers and formal interactions with professors. Through careful observation and analysis, our research uncovers the nuances of word choice, tone, and syntax in these differing contexts. We aim to understand how social settings influence language socialization within academic communities. Our findings reveal that students tend to employ a more casual, slang-infused language among peers while adopting a more structured and formal language when engaging with faculty. These findings highlight the adaptability of linguistic practices within differing contexts, as seen in the discrepancy between a languid and relaxed setting versus an academic one, and reveal deeper insight into the social dynamics at play. Join us in exploring the intricate play of language in the college setting, where each conversation reflects the complex interplay of social norms, power dynamics, and cultural identity.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

Our research focuses on the intricate ways college students adjust their language in different academic settings, particularly at UCLA. Previous studies, like those by Patricia A. Duff and others, have highlighted language socialization in academic contexts. However, there’s less focus on how students’ language shifts in real-time interactions between diverse groups such as peers and professors. We aim to bridge this gap by analyzing how UCLA students’ word choice, tone, and syntax vary when communicating with peers versus academic staff. Our hypothesis posits that students’ language becomes more informal, slang-heavy, and less complex in peer interactions compared to more formal, carefully structured conversations with faculty, reflecting underlying power dynamics and social norms.

Here’s a link to a video by Cambridge University Press that explains “academic language” to give you an idea of what we’ll be discussing in this blog!

Methods

In our study, we centered our investigation on the linguistic style shifts among UCLA students in academic contexts. Our focus was on two primary interaction scenarios: between students themselves and between students and their professors.

People and Contexts Observed:

  • Student-Student Interactions: Conversations among peers, both within and outside classroom settings, were recorded. These interactions provided insights into the informal communication styles prevalent in peer groups.
  • Student-Professor Interactions: We also observed and recorded interactions between students and faculty members. This setting offered a contrasting view of more formal and structured communication.

What We Analyzed:

  • Word Choice: We paid close attention to the vocabulary used in different social settings. Our analysis focused on identifying the use of informal language and slang among peers, compared to more formal and academic language in interactions with professors.
  • Syntax and Structure: The complexity of sentence construction and use of grammatical structures were analyzed to observe variations in formality and complexity.
  • Tone: The emotional and attitudinal aspects of speech, such as enthusiasm, respect, or hesitation, were observed to understand the relational dynamics in different interactions. Take a look at this video to better understand the importance of how we say things, beyond what we say.

Data Collection Method:

  • A mix of participant observation and ethnographic fieldwork was employed. This involved walking with, talking with, and recording the daily life and conversations of students. Both audio recordings and hand-transcriptions of conversations were utilized.

By focusing on these observable elements in communication, our study aimed to illuminate how linguistic practices are adapted to different social contexts within the academic environment. Technicalities not central to our primary analysis, such as detailed linguistic theories, were omitted for clarity and accessibility to a general audience. This approach ensured that our study remained engaging and understandable, while still maintaining academic rigor.

Results

Here is what some of our data ended up looking like:

Student-Student Conversation

Student 1: Yeah, the bystander effect. It’s like, when there’s a bunch of people, everyone thinks someone else will step up. Ends up with no one helping. Pretty messed up and craaaazy.

Student 2: That’s tea. It makes you wonder, huh? Did you guys then talk about how different countries do things differently?

Student 1: Oh yeah, it’s all about the culture vibe. Like, some places are all “pick me girls,” while others are like “No worry girly.” (laughing)

Student 2: No literallyyyy. Social psych’s got some real “shit” going on.

Student-Professor Conversation

Student: In the lecture, you mentioned the bystander effect. Can you explain more on that?

Professor: Oh yes I can. So, the bystander effect refers to the phenomenon where individuals are less likely to offer help to a victim when other people are present. It’s often due to a fear of responsibility, where the bystander assumes someone else will intervene.

Student: I see. So how does this relate to social responsibility?

Professor: Hmm social responsibility is an individual’s obligation to act for the benefit of society at large. So like in the context of the bystander effect, it challenges the individuals to overcome the fear of responsibility and take action when they witness someone in need of help.

Student: Oh ok I get it. And last question (slight haha) what about the role of culture in social psychology?

Professor: So culture plays a significant role in shaping our social behaviors and attitudes. Different cultures have different norms and values, which could influence how people perceive and interact with each other. Like for example, individualistic cultures might emphasize personal achievements, while collectivist cultures focus on their group harmony.

Student: OK I got that down. Thank you so much for your time, Professor!

So what does this tell us?

These two conversations, both of which cover the “bystander effect” of social psychology, show completely different ways of having very similar conversations. Even though both conversations cover the bystander effect, and in each one the speaker is asking questions while one is answering and explaining, the language used is very different.

The use of slang in the student-student conversation – words like “tea,” “craaaazy,” and “literalyyyy” – are not present in the student-professor conversation. This suggests that students are perfectly capable of discussing academic topics in the way they ‘typically’ speak – with friends and in their social interactions, but they are intentionally censoring themselves and electing for “academic language” when speaking with professors.

The fact that the professor, here, is not speaking with the same total academic language, and still uses phrases such as, “so like” and “hmmm,” suggests that they do not feel the same sense of need to maintain formality in the way the student does. This shows us that despite the absence of reciprocal formality within student-professor interactions, when speaking with a faculty member or professor, the student still understands their position in this conversation as relatively powerless and more subservient.

In analyzing syntax and structure, we found conflicting conclusions in students’ willingness to formalize their speech around professors versus their peers. In conversations with peers, students tended to include longer sentences that more frequently lacked correct grammatical structure and syntax as ruled by academic standards of speech. However, these sentences were more truncated and were often shortened to mere phrases that included only enough to communicate a simple idea. In contrast, students’ interactions with the professor included simpler sentence structure, yet more grammatically correct. Student 1’s use of the phrases, “Ends up with no one helping” and “Pretty messed up and craaaazy” as well as Student 2’s response later in the conversation, “No literallyyyy” highlight this phenomenon. By standards imposed through academia’s use of American Standard English, all of these examples would be considered incorrect grammatically and incomplete in syntax. They all lack subjects and therefore rely on the context surrounding it with the conversation being had in order to correctly interpret their meanings. These examples can be contrasted with the student’s interactions with the professor, in which all sentences are complete and use academically correct syntax structure. The students’ sentences are more concise in their lack of filler words and slang, and yet grammatically more correct. This again, may point to power imbalances within these two interactions – students may feel less willing or comfortable to talk extensively with professors than with peers due to the perceived power imbalance, as well as feel more restricted in their expression, as is reflected in the formality of their structure and syntax.

The last aspect of speech we analyzed was a difference in tone. In comparing the two examples provided, we found that student to student interactions included a more playful tone, similar to banter, while the student to professor interaction held a more professional tone, lacking in comfort and familiarity. When the student talked to their peer, the two indiscriminately contributed to the conversation without self-consciousness, providing multiple affirmations and adding onto the points already stated. However, in the conversation between student and professor, the student’s conversation largely comprised of a quick and simple affirmation that they were listening to the professor’s speech, followed by another quick and concise question. The discrepancy between these two interactions again highlights the students’ need to adjust their manner of speaking due to their social status. As the student interacts with individuals with a wider gap in social standing, their speech reflects that change in the comfort at which they are capable of communicating with their counterparts.

Key and Peele, Comedy Central (2012)

Discussion and Conclusion

Academia is just one locale in which this linguistic phenomenon can be recognized. The same linguistic changes that we noticed between students speaking with fellow students, and students speaking with professors appear elsewhere. There is a palpable power dynamic between professors and students, which is reflected in the changes in word choice, syntax, and tone of students we recorded in each conversation group.

Other relationships with a similar power dynamic – for example, manager-employee or parent-child – would see similar shifts from the ‘lower’ positioned speaker’s standard casual mode of communication, and the way they communicate in these partnerships. Even more pertinent social commentary can be drawn from the linguistic-change patterns detected in our research. Power relations that result from socially constructed hierarchies, like racial differences, gender differences, or more specific circumstances like interactions with police officers, demonstrate similar linguistic changes.

This phenomenon suggests that linguistic patterns and tonal choices are not only reflections of existing social strata and power relations but are simultaneously contributing to the establishment and maintenance of these strata. Our research, therefore, both reflects and contributes to the existing literature on the interactions of linguistics and social power dynamics, via this case study on academic communication.

References

Alkhudair, R. Y. (2019). Professors’ and Undergraduate Students’ Perceptions and Attitudes Toward the Use of Code-Switching and Its Function in Academic Classrooms. International Journal of English Linguistics, 9(6), 160-. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v9n6p160

Costa, J. (2015). Can Schools Dispense with Standard Language? Some Unintended Consequences of Introducing Scots in a Scottish Primary School. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 25(1), 25–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/jola.12069

Davydova, J. (2022). The role of social factors in the acquisition of vernacular English: A variationist study with pedagogical implications. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 32(3), 425–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12438

Duff, P. A. (2010). Language Socialization into Academic Discourse Communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30(Mar), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000048

Hamre, B. K., Pianta, R. C., Downer, J. T., DeCoster, J., Mashburn, A. J., Jones, S. M., Brown, J. L., Cappella, E., Atkins, M., Rivers, S. E., Brackett, M. A., & Hamagami, A. (2013). Teaching through Interactions: Testing a Developmental Framework of Teacher Effectiveness in over 4,000 Classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 113(4), 461–487. https://doi.org/10.1086/669616

Hutton, S. (2022). The burden of code-switching: U-M LSA U-M COLLEGE OF LSA. U. https://lsa.umich.edu/lsa/news-events/lsa-magazine/Summer-2022/the-burden-of-code–switching.html

“I’m Retired.” Key and Peele, Keegan-Michael Key and Jordan Peele, season two, episode four, Comedy Central, 2012.

Poola, V. P., Suh, B., Parr, T., Boehler, M., Han, H., & Mellinger, J. (2021). Medical students’ reflections on surgical educators’ professionalism: Contextual nuances in the hidden curriculum. The American Journal of Surgery, 221(2), 270–276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2020.09.003

Sicoli, M. A. (2010). Shifting voices with participant roles: Voice qualities and speech registers in Mesoamerica. Language in Society, 39(4), 521–553. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404510000436 

Weir, Peter. Dead Poets Society. Buena Vista Pictures Distribution, 1989.

Woodbridge, A. (2021). “If I’d Heard That Earlier, It Would Have Changed My Academic Experience”: Connections Between Language Brokering and Undergraduate Academic Writing  / by Amy Woodbridge. University of California, Los Angeles.

[/expander_maker]

Professor-Student Register Differences

Something students are conditioned to do is change the way they speak to people in power, specifically their professors. They want to sound knowledgeable and inquisitive, refraining from using slang, meme speaks, and overuse of filler words. One difference we were intrigued by was register changes in lectures. Register is defined as the style of speaking and writing distinguished by its formality, purpose, or audience. Key aspects include vocabulary/jargon, tone, or grammar complexity. This research explored how university students linguistically interact with their professors and classmates in upper and lower-division courses, focusing on register changes. Previous research in this field of study found that students who are fluent in two languages (English and French) use control processes to produce speech registers that are either formal or informal (Declerck et al., 2020). Our null hypothesis was that no difference in the register formality occurred between upper and lower-division courses. Our alternative hypothesis was that register changes were more significant, including the formality in upper-division courses through primarily observational methods and a supplemental survey. This research is important to analyze the way register changes can be impacted by a student’s conditioning and how professors can use this impact to reframe their lecture approach.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Background

Linguistic registers are characteristics of speaking or writing that can change situationally. These registers can reflect the speaker’s identity and the relationship between the speaker and the person they are speaking to (Agha, 2005). The observations made in upper and lower-division courses will let us know how students change their register formality and if this change is dependent on whether the class encourages a more formal register when responding to questions or communicating with one another.

Methods

Using Biber and Conrad’s guide on register analysis in Register, Genre, and Style as a reference, we approached analyzing linguistic register changes in university classrooms with the following steps:

  • Note the environment and situation of the research setting and how these can affect the characteristics of observed registers.
  • Record any register features that can be considered ‘normal.’
  • Compare and contrast the average features of the register with features of the register that were observed to be situational.

To distinguish between formal and informal register in the courses we observed, we classified formal language as any language that had proper grammar, included references to some sort of study or concept, utilized terms that are appropriate to the subject matter, and language that demonstrates respect and formality through the use of a professional tone. An informal register was classified as any language that seemed more conversational or less structured, personal or subjective, did not include terms indicative of the class material, explained certain concepts in simple language, and used a more relaxed tone when participating in discussions.

Considering this method and understanding of registers, researchers attended in-person and recorded lectures at the University of California, Los Angeles, and office hours for select courses, accumulating data from twenty lectures. The lectures were chosen based on their lower or upper division status, two lower and two upper courses. In these settings, we expected to observe a difference in the linguistic register, with the hypothesis that students in upper-division courses had a more formal register because they were experienced and ready to enter the workforce.

The classrooms of the lectures we researched were situated with the speaker at the front, usually on a stage or near some podium with many seats facing forward. This arrangement establishes a sense of hierarchy, control, and power. However, the practice and enforcement of this hierarchy depended on how the professors taught and carried themselves along with the room. Some professors encouraged students to speak and contribute to the discussion, while others preferred to control the conversations to remain on schedule. Student-to-student conversations were minimal but still observed.

Our goal was to observe intently during lectures how students interacted with the professor and how that differed from the conversations amongst fellow students. Also, why was this difference significant, and what factors could influence this conditioned shift in speech behavior? To supplement our observational research, we asked students and professors a 5-question multiple choice survey to gauge how they felt about their register or how aware they were of it. The questions and choices were as follows:

  1. Do you know what a linguistic register is? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
  2. Do you notice differences in speaking in upper and lower-division courses? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
  3. Do you notice how your speech changes when discussing or conversing with your peers and professors? (Yes/Somewhat/No)
  4. Do you think factors like professor approachability, classroom size, and course subject influence how you adjust your language in an academic setting?                                                                              (Yes/Somewhat/No)
  5. Are there words or phrases you use more frequently in an academic setting that you would not use elsewhere or vice versa?                                                                                                                              (Yes/Somewhat/No)

Results

Through careful observation, we noticed a significant change in the linguistic register in ten lower and ten upper-division lectures. This is in addition to the results of our supplemental survey, which revealed that students did notice a difference in their registers in their upper—and lower-division courses, noting that they indeed use a more formal register within their upper-division courses.

In upper-division courses, we noticed that students had more formal vocabularies and tended to express their ideas more structured and logically by referencing past concepts and citing where they got their answers or supporting evidence. As for lower-division courses, students used a more informal register, which led to students just trying to get their point across and ending their sentences in a way that made it seem as if they were unsure about their response. Students in lower-division courses also appeared to use words such as “um,” “uhh,” and “I think” more often than students in upper-division courses.

In a particular upper division course, the professor began every lecture by yelling “GOOD AFTERNOON” and expected a loud response, often requesting a redo if it was unsatisfactory. In an informal interview with this professor, she said it was to encourage students to have a voice in a large classroom. She stated that she would prefer a smaller classroom where they could be sitting in a circle. She often ended her lecture 30 minutes before class ended because she saw great importance in students discussing with each other and listening to different perspectives. This engagement was an attempt at breaking the hierarchical barrier of the class setting.

Graph 1 shows the difference in formality observed in the upper-division courses we observed throughout the ten lectures. Graph 2 shows the difference in formality observed in the
lower-division courses throughout ten lectures.

The graphs provided show the difference in formality between the upper- and lower-division courses we observed. Upper-division courses, for the most part, had formal register/language, while lower-division courses mostly had informal register/language.

Another interesting observation we noticed in both upper- and lower-division courses is that students who speak two languages and have a particular accent when talking to another student who may or may not share similar cultures seem to turn their accent off whenever they talk to an individual in a position of power, such as a professor or teacher assistant.

Analysis

These conclusions rejected our null hypothesis and supported the alternative hypothesis that there is a significant difference in the register used in upper-division courses versus those used in lower-division courses. Worth noting is that the reason for a more formal register in upper-division courses is the fact that upper-division courses necessitate the development of critical thinking, which requires students to express their ideas and responses in a more structured and logical manner, which further goes to show the complexity within the concepts seen in these courses. As shown in the graphs within the results, upper-division courses mainly used formal language, while lower-division courses used informal language. The bars on the graph that showed minimal informal or formal language in each respective course resulted from some days in the upper-division courses being relatively easygoing and not necessitating much discussion, while the formal register occurrences in lower-division courses happened as a result of professors making the student think critically about their answer and add to the discussion of the class on a specific complex concept.

Through this research, the discussion opens about how professors can facilitate change that empowers students to speak in their classrooms. With this knowledge, an improvement will likely create a better learning space while maintaining a professional register. The power dynamics do not have to be so stark that they intimidate students to not participate in lectures. However, professors should teach in a way that their course will introduce students to a more formal register early on in the course and gradually increase the emphasis on formal language as the course progresses. Especially in lower-division courses where informal linguistic register is standard, these changes will benefit students (more than likely first- and second-year students) in the long run, where future professional and academic environments will necessitate the use of formal language to express their critical thinking.

References

Agha, A., Duranti, A. (2005). Registers of Language. In A Companion to Linguistic Anthropology (pp. 23–45). https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/web.sas.upenn.edu/dist/1/494/files/2018/08/19Agha2004RegistersOfLang-13dji2r.pdf 

Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Register, genre, and style / Douglas Biber, Susan Conrad. (Second edition.). Cambridge University Press.

Declerck, M., Ivanova, I., Grainger, J., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2020). Are similar control processes Implemented during single and dual-language production? Evidence from switching between speech registers and languages. Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 23(3), 694–701. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000695

Goulart, L., Gray, B., Staples, S., Black, A., Shelton, A., Biber, D., … & Wizner, S. (2020). Linguistic perspectives on register. Annual Review of Linguistics, 6, 435-455.

Washington-Harmon, T. (2024, January 5). Code-switching has benefits and risks-but why do we do it? Health. https://www.health.com/mind-body/health-diversity-inclusion/code-switching

[/expander_maker]

Unveiling Linguistic Appropriation: A Dive into Slang Usage on Twitter

Asfa Khan and Ayub Abdul-Cader

A world where words wield power and every hashtag tells a story—welcome to the exploration of slang on Twitter.

Exploring the intricate dance between language, identity, and culture, this study delves into the phenomenon of linguistic appropriation on Twitter. Focusing on the adoption of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) by non-Black individuals, particularly white working-class Twitter users, we uncover patterns that illuminate the dynamics of identity formation in digital spaces. Through analysis of tweets from Black Drag Queens and white Twitter users, we dissect linguistic elements such as phonetics, word choice, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Our findings reveal a nuanced picture of language use, shedding light on the motivations behind linguistic appropriation and its implications for cultural dynamics and societal norms.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

African American Vernacular English (AAVE): The Dialect We Call Our Own – Because of Them We Can

In today’s digital age, social media platforms like Twitter serve as microcosms of linguistic diversity, offering insights into how language is used and appropriated across different communities. Our study zooms in on the use of slang, particularly AAVE, among Black Drag Queens and white working-class Twitter users. The origin of these slangs has been falsified for many years, as many in the linguistic community believed working-class men were the main group who created/implemented AAVE. As seen by the UMASS research group, “early work on AAE perpetuated myths that the language variety was uniform across regions and that it was spoken primarily by working-class men, due to being conducted in inner city areas and examining a specific set of linguistic features” (Masis 2023). These myths have only further fueled the fire that is cultural appropriation, specifically in regards to AAVE slang which are primarily used and created by the Black Drag Queen Community.  By examining linguistic patterns, we aim to address the appropriation and misuse of AAVE by non-Black individuals, highlighting its impact on cultural dynamics and identity formation. This research builds upon existing literature in linguistic anthropology, which underscores the need to recognize and honor the origins of linguistic expressions while promoting mindfulness regarding their impact on marginalized communities.


Methods

We employed two primary methods for data collection: identifying key accounts and leveraging hashtags and trends related to drag culture and AAVE. By focusing on tweets from Black Drag Queens and white Twitter users, we analyzed linguistic elements such as phonetics, word choice, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. Our analysis aimed to uncover patterns of linguistic appropriation and identity formation within digital environments.

Results

Our analysis revealed a discernible trend wherein white Twitter users demonstrate a propensity to adopt and replicate the linguistic style characteristic of Black Drag Queen Twitter users. Analyzing Tweets by white, middle-class men and Black Drag Queens helped us understand the misuses of AAVE efficiently. A white man used the words “Yo this is bussin” in a tweet and a famous phrase that originates in African communities non-individuals from communities using AAVE is cultural appropriation. Linguistic analysis allows us to understand when words are being used as cultural appropriation.

Discussion

While Black Drag Queens employ AAVE as an intrinsic component of their everyday discourse, white users often utilize it as a means to cultivate an alternative dimension of their identity primarily manifesting within the online realm of Twitter. Examples such as the use of “ass” as a postpositive particle and the alteration of “with” to “wit” exemplify this linguistic appropriation.

Bob the Drag Queen Teaches You Drag Slang | Vanity Fair

Our findings contribute to a deeper understanding of the complex interplay between language, identity, and culture in digital spaces. By uncovering patterns of linguistic appropriation, we shed light on the motivations behind the adoption of AAVE by non-Black individuals and its implications for cultural dynamics. This research underscores the need for individuals to be mindful of the impact of their language on marginalized communities and to respect cultural heritage and contributions. Furthermore, it highlights the importance of recognizing and honoring the origins of linguistic expressions while promoting inclusive and respectful communication practices.

This study draws inspiration from literature in linguistic anthropology, which emphasizes the role of language in shaping cultural dynamics and identity formation. Scholars have long discussed the appropriation and misuse of AAVE by non-Black individuals, highlighting its perpetuation of harmful stereotypes and inequalities. According to the UMASS research group, led by Tessa Masis, “Our results show that, contrary to sociolinguistic myths of uniformity, there is clear variation in AAE across both geographic and social dimensions (Masis 2023).”

 By building upon this literature, our research offers a nuanced analysis of linguistic appropriation on Twitter, providing insights into the motivations and implications of language use in digital environments. In the ever-evolving landscape of digital communication, the exploration of slang on Twitter serves as a window into the complexities of language, identity, and culture. Through our research, we invite readers to delve deeper into the nuances of linguistic appropriation, fostering a deeper understanding of the power dynamics at play in online discourse. As we navigate the digital labyrinth of Twitter, let us remain vigilant in our pursuit of inclusive and respectful communication practices, honoring the rich tapestry of linguistic diversity that defines our digital landscape.

 Conclusion

In the dynamic world of digital communication, where language shapes identities and cultures, our study serves as a springboard for future research endeavors exploring linguistic appropriation and digital discourse. Our research methodology lays a sturdy groundwork for data collection and analysis. By integrating the identification of key accounts with the exploration of relevant hashtags and trends, researchers can cast a wide net to gather a diverse dataset reflecting various linguistic communities on Twitter.  Our focus on analyzing linguistic elements such as phonetics, word choice, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics offers researchers a multifaceted lens through which to examine patterns of linguistic appropriation. Potential analysis tools such as the BERT machine learning tool, used by the UMASS research group in order to narrow down research methods.  These methods provide a more efficient way of analyzing tweets in specific, due to there being hundreds of millions of tweets throughout the history of the social media app. “Many feature-based studies of large corpora use keyword searches or regular expressions to detect features; however, keyword searches are limited by orthographic variation in tweets and regular expressions cannot be made for all features. To circumvent these obstacles, we use the BERT-based machine learning method used in Masis et al” (Masis, 2023).

 By employing similar analytical techniques, researchers can uncover subtle nuances in language use and identity formation within digital environments. This approach fosters a deeper understanding of the intricate interplay between language, culture, and identity in online spaces. Researchers can expand on this theme by exploring the implications of linguistic appropriation for marginalized communities and investigating strategies for promoting respectful and equitable language use in online spaces.

References

Ilbury, C. (2019). “Sassy Queens”: Stylistic orthographic variation in Twitter and the enregisterment of AAVE. Journal of Sociolinguistics. 24. 10.1111/josl.12366.

Magazine, Smithsonian. “The First Self-Proclaimed Drag Queen Was a Formerly Enslaved Man.” Smithsonian.Com, Smithsonian Institution, 9 June 2023, www.smithsonianmag.com/history/the-first-self-proclaimed-drag-queen-was-a-formerly-enslaved-man-180982311/.

Masis, Tessa; Eggleston, Chloe; Green, Lisa J.; Jones, Taylor; Armstrong, Meghan; and O’Connor, Brendan (2023) “Investigating Morphosyntactic Variation in African American English on Twitter,” Proceedings of the Society for Computation in Linguistics: Vol. 6, Article 41.DOI: https://doi.org/10.7275/zdg0-0914

[/expander_maker]

The Role of Phatic Expressions in Group Identity

“How are you today?” Wait- Before you answer this, consider that this innocuous question in fact is compelling you to respond in a certain way. This phatic expression is a social tool aimed at maintaining communication channels. But these expressions also contain packets of information intended to guide the recipient’s behavior. This project aims to recognize the significance of phatic expressions in communication dynamics and how they intertwine with identity development. Our study will aim to go deep into the intricate relationship between language similarities and identity formation within the context of a vibrant Latina community. We will focus on undergraduate Latina students affiliated with UCLA’s Hermanas Unidas organization. We also gathered data on how people in the Latina community often used slang to communicate with their peers. The use of slang made their communication more personal and easier. We examined informal speech and phatic expressions in English-Spanish dialogue within the Latina community. By observing the way they spoke their language and communicated with slang, we gathered that language truly shapes relationships and reveals the complex layers of language, identity, and communication dynamics. This study will allow us to observe how language forms relationships and unravel the various layers of language, identity, and communication.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction & Background

Within Jakobson’s six language functions, the emotive and conative functions are specifically those which convey information about the speaker and recipient. The latter function is generally considered to contain imperatives in the form of information about the recipient. However, certain other language functions also index facets of the identities of participants in this way or feature similar containerization. Among these are phatic expressions, those which are concerned primarily with the communication channel (Žegarac and Clark, 2024).

A commonly recognized form of phatic expression is a greeting such as, “How was your day?” Chances are, the questioner would find it frustrating if they were met with every detail of the respondent’s day. So, by asking “How are you?” The questioner is compelling the listener to respond only in a certain way. Therefore, this expression might be considered to have an imperative component. That’s not necessarily a bad thing– it provides the recipient with a quick and easy path to the locus of the conversation. But this additional capability for encoding the intentions and attitudes of the speaker can obviously be exploited for certain ends. Therefore, we were curious about whether or not phatic expressions are actually used by speakers to transmit information this way. We at first wondered about the exclusionary purposes of these expressions; for example, in the aforementioned example, the speaker is attempting to exclude a certain unwanted response. We realized that this exclusionary purpose may serve to delineate inter-group and intra-group identities. Therefore, we also asked to what extent phatic expressions index group identities in general. In fact, could phatic expressions also help to establish and maintain notions of identity by these mechanisms?

Methods

Figure 1: An instance of a phatic expression that indexes shared group knowledge

Figure 2: Use of phatic expressions during a representative 3-minute sample of presentations at a Hermanas Unidas club meeting. Instances featuring implicit imperative components, as well as instances that index specific aspects of the shared club and/or linguistic identity are indicated

Our research was conducted on two meetings for the club Hermanas Unidas de UCLA, the first being a general body meeting where group members welcome both past members and new members to meet on a weekly basis to discuss different topics and act as a debrief circle, and the second meeting being an event where past members,  also open to new members as well, meet to complete activities and talk in a more intimate space in comparison to the general body meeting. The general body meeting consisted of around 30 members, while the second event only had about 15. In both settings, members were prompted to both speak in the large setting to the entire group, and were also split into smaller groups. In these settings, we were able to analyze the communication between the members and how it shifted when there either was use of phatic expressions, or was not. This club primarily consists of Latina undergraduate members, so we were able to observe the use of phatic expressions in both Spanish and English, as well as both languages used together. When members spoke in the larger settings during the general body meetings, it was noted that the main speaker was often using words such as “y’all” and “um”, which made the speaker sound more natural when addressing the crowd, as well as the crowd being more engaging.

For this reason, we decided to analyze the presentation section of the general body meeting in order to establish a reliable baseline of phatic expression use relative to our specific areas of interest. We isolated a 3-minute segment of audio in which there were multiple presenters who would generally introduce themselves and their announcements, allowing for significant use of phatic expressions during the analyzed time period. The results are indicated in Figure 2: a significant fraction of the phatic expressions observed contain the imperative elements, index aspects of group identity, or both. During the second meeting, where members were split into groups of about 4-5 and were prompted with more personal questions. While the members were tasked to complete the activity they were given and answer these ice breaker kinds of questions, there was an instant switch in how communication was being made. We were able to hear phrases such as “I could’ve easily done Superman bro”, the word “like” and “literally”, “aw hell nah bruh” and using Spanish words when communicating (Araceli, 2010). The use of phatic expressions here also caused a more natural flow of conversation, more engaging body movement, and overall more emotion, such as laughing and smiling.      

Results and Analysis

Upon thorough analysis of our data, particularly within a 3-minute segment of the general body meeting where a club member addressed the audience with an announcement, we observed the utilization patterns of “um” and “y’all.” The incorporation of phatic expressions notably enhanced the crowd’s engagement, leading to cheers from the rest of the club members. During this significant moment, the speaker effectively conveyed information that resonated with each audience member, fostering a collective connection. The evident impact of the speaker’s language in captivating the crowd underscores the influential role of phatic expressions in communication. Moreover, we encountered similar findings in the second dataset collected during a smaller meeting. Despite the smaller group dynamics, participants’ use of phatic expressions facilitated deeper engagement among individuals, rendering conversations more meaningful. This highlights the universal efficacy of phatic expressions in fostering interpersonal connections, irrespective of the setting or audience size.

Discussion and Conclusions

In relation to language, culture, and the course content overall, analyzing the use of phatic expressions through an anthropological lens provided us with a nuanced perspective of the use of phatic expressions within interpersonal communication and interethnic encounters. Examining the usage of language functions among Latina students on campus offered us insights into their communication dynamics and social comfort levels in these settings. This also uncovered unique communication patterns and preferences and provided an intimate look into the interplay between language and social interaction. In the overall aim of our project, we planned to identify specific language functions as they appeared in conversation, specifically at the Hermanas Unidas club meetings, and analyze how expressions that serve specific functions are used to accommodate differing identities (including linguistic and club identity). One of our research questions we want to answer is “In which cases do phatic expressions serve an exclusionary purpose?”, and we identified that _these uses of exclusionary language with words like ‘bruh’, ‘like’, or ‘literally’ did not serve an intentional purpose but rather a means of reinforcing cohesion and camaraderie amongst the group of students in the campus-organization Hermanas Unidas. Additionally, we captured how these interactions and use of expressions help to shape these students’ cultural identity in various sociocultural environments whether on campus or elsewhere.

References

De Katzew, L. (2004). Interlingualism: T]he language of Chicanos/as.

Nordquist, R. (2019, March 11). Making small talk: Phatic Communication. ThoughtCo. https://www.thoughtco.com/phatic-communication-1691619

Osorio, Araceli, “The role of Spanglish in the social and academic lives of second generation Latino students: students’ and parents’ perspectives” (2010). Doctoral Dissertations. 366. https://repository.usfca.edu/diss/366

Otto Santa Ana, A. (1993). Chicano English and the nature of the Chicano language setting. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 15, 3-3.

Vlad Žegarac, and Billy Clark. “Phatic Interpretations and Phatic Communication.” Journal of Linguistics, vol. 35, no. 2, 1999, pp. 321–46. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4176528. Accessed 1 Feb. 2024

Culture and Language: How Stigma Can Impact Students’ Mental Health Conversations

College students in America have had a rise in mental health concerns, finding themselves facing internal and external troubles when seeking support and open dialogue. Although past studies discuss the external factors that impact the rise in mental health concerns in college students, few discuss the cultural factors that affect these college students’ ability to seek and maintain support– particularly in the Chinese community, which has been found to carry a stigma for mental health. This study looks at the cultural influences that impact the conversation surrounding the mental health of Chinese college students. Using data from semi-structured interviews, this study frames the cultural reasons for how Chinese college students view mental health and support for mental health. Chinese UCLA undergraduate students discuss their mental health experience in three different contexts: with themselves, their family, and their friends. These students emphasize the difficulties of growing up in a community that stigmatizes mental health and lacks an open dialogue about it. Conversations growing up had impacted their own perceptions. These students needed to learn how to approach mental health conversations. The experiences and perceptions of mental health discussion of these students suggest that stigma perpetuated through communication can cause Chinese students and others from stigmatizing cultures to face various cultural challenges that hinder them from feeling confident in seeking resources.

[expander_maker id=”1″ more=”Read more” less=”Read less”]

Introduction

In recent years, there has been an increase in conversation about the mental health crisis, specifically in the student population. More than half of college students have at least one mental health problem. As mental health becomes a more significant crisis, there is a need to understand how different communities perceive and discuss the topic of mental health, as communication plays an essential role in perpetuating stigma (Rusch et al., 2005). A crucial aspect of understanding people’s perceptions of mental health would be their background.

Past studies have shown that in Chinese and other Asian communities, there is a great deal of mental health stigma, followed by a lack of knowledge and discussion on mental health. Understanding the perspective of one community of college students provides a significant opportunity to see how culture and its stigma could impact how people discuss mental health and, in turn, address it.

Background

In the Chinese community and other Asian communities, there is a mental health stigma and a lack of mental health knowledge (Yin et al., 2020; Shu et al., 2022). In recent years, there have been increased conversations about the mental health crisis, specifically in the student population. Past studies have found that more than 60% of college students have at least one mental health problem, with there being an increased rate of anxiety, depression, and suicidal ideation on college campuses (Lipson et al., 2022; Pedrelli et al., 2014).

As mental health becomes a bigger crisis, there is a need to understand how different communities perceive and discuss the topic of mental health. An important aspect of understanding people’s perception of mental health would be to consider their background.

Chinese undergraduate students may face mental health complications but struggle to address them because of their cultural stigma. In particular, perceptions of mental health by their parents may play a role in how they manage their mental health. Disconnects between immigrant parents and their children have been reported in previous studies. The variation in how people interpret language has significantly changed, and one is more likely to find a disconnect between how individuals interpret words, phrases, and expressions (Sharma & Dodsworth, 2020). Such differences may play a role in how Chinese undergraduate students perceive stigmatized topics and discuss them within their community and their parents. It is essential that we understand how culture and relationships may impact perceptions of mental health and language (Toppelberg & Collins, 2010). Understanding these variations, even if just in the Chinese undergraduate community, will allow for a better understanding of how to address stigma around critical health topics like mental health.

Methods

This research was conducted with UCLA Chinese undergraduate students. Interviewees were recruited through word-of-mouth. They participated in an in-person, 15-to-30-minute, semi-structured interview to answer open-ended questions (see Appendix). This structure allowed a natural conversation flow when discussing a heavy topic like mental health to understand how language and culture are intertwined.

Five Chinese undergraduate students participated in the interviews. Two are international students from China, and three are domestic students from America. To analyze our data, we used grounded theory to categorize and frame the prominent ideas expressed by our participants.

Positionality

Four undergraduate students conducted this study for a linguistic anthropology project. Each researcher is of a different ethnicity and background, and only one researcher is a member of the Chinese community. As college students, we recognize the significance of mental health and hope to understand the cultural and linguistic nuances of how students like us perceive mental health.

Findings and Analysis

Our five interviewees shared three main experiences, established through grounded theory to understand our interviewees’ beliefs about mental health dialogue.

Lack of Conversation

Growing up, Chinese undergraduate students did not have conversations about mental health with their parents. If these topics did come up, they were stigmatized, broad, and swept under the rug. Our participants emphasized how they have tried talking to their parents about mental health, only for the topic to be highly frowned upon and ignored. The only conversations about mental health that our participants had were stigmatizing, creating a negative perception of mental health and the lack of ability to discuss mental health.

Learning About Mental Health and its Dialogue

After coming to college, students had to grapple with mental health and how to really talk about it, especially to their peers. Starting conversations and looking for support was difficult because they felt they lacked a foundation due to their culture and how they were raised. These conversations were only sought after they started college and were away from home.

Figure 1: Quotes from two Chinese undergraduate students talking about their current journey with mental health and its dialogue. Participant 2 (left box) needed to learn how to talk to her peers. Participant 3 (right box) believed that their upbringing and their parents’ mental health stigma played a role in their ability to address their mental health.

Chinese students who grew up in a family that stigmatized mental health, primarily through conversation or a lack of conversation, came into college feeling uncomfortable with starting conversations about mental health. Even when they sought out support from friends, it was a slow process. One student stated that it was a “trial and error phase,” they were uncomfortable talking to their friends or therapist but knew it was necessary for “healing.” In the same conversation, they said they slowly learned how to “properly” tell their friends as they never learned how to. Participants implied that they feel like there is a right way to talk about mental health, but they lacked the toolkit to do so due to their cultural upbringing.

Differences Between Conversations and Language with Parents and Peers

Students meticulously choose words when talking to their parents because they recognize the culture and barriers they were raised with. When they brought mental health up as an undergraduate student, they used terms they believed would be better accepted by their parents.

Figure 2
Quotes from two Chinese undergraduate students talking about how and why there are differences in how they talk about mental health to their parents versus their peers. Participant 1 (left box) reveals how he has to think about the right words to use to talk about his mental health with his parents. Participant 4 (right box) believed that because their parents have a specific view of what mental health is, they have to be careful with how they talk about mental health, especially if it does not fit their parents’ perception.

When speaking with peers, participants believed they had a space to be accepted, compared to speaking with their parents. During these conversations with their peers, they openly use terms like “depression,” “anxiety,” and “panic attacks.” When speaking with their parents, they use euphemisms. One participant uses “stress” instead of “depressed” because their parents better understand it, though it is still brushed over in conversations. The identity that was being used in each conversation was different. Students were less afraid of being identified as “mentally struggling” when with their friends. Participants expressed that they felt it was something they were all going through. However, using these linguistic labels with parents or elders felt much too far. Three participants indicated that the words “depressed” or “anxious” held more negative weight if said in Chinese in contrast to their English-speaking friends.

Discussion and Conclusions

The beliefs and experiences of these Chinese undergraduate students imply that culture plays a role in the language people use to discuss mental health. Cultural stigma can be perpetuated through the use of communication. Our Chinese participants grew up with a lack of positive mental health dialogue. Mental health dialogues were negative and filled with stigmatizing language. This led to our participants feeling unsure about seeking conversations about mental health with their parents at home.

The lack of opportunities to learn how to discuss mental health created difficulties when it came time for them to have these conversations. When mental health became an important topic in college, where their peers and themselves faced mental health experiences, these Chinese students felt ill-prepared to conversationally start and address the topic. Because of their upbringing, they needed to learn how to reframe their and others’ potential perception of mental health to feel comfortable doing so. Recognizing their parents’ and their peers’ opposing perceptions of mental health impacts the way they choose to talk about mental health, code-switching for the comfort of their parents.

 Communities with stigmatizing cultural beliefs about mental health could lead to individuals having trouble accessing the support that they need because they lack the language to have and start conversations about their mental health. It is then essential to increase access to resources for parents and younger generations. Parents should become knowledgeable about mental health and normalize its dialogue to reduce stigmatization and be open to their children. These resources could provide younger generations with an avenue to recognize and learn about mental health and address it when necessary. Knowing the role of culture also allows professionals to be more culturally aware and adaptive.

Culture can affect how and if people communicate about topics, eventually impacting whether or not people are confident in seeking the right resources. As the mental health crisis among students rises, it is critical to consider all of the factors that could be mitigated to allow students to seek the support they need.

References

Babchuk, Wayne A. and Hitchcock, Robert K. (2013). “Grounded Theory Ethnography: Merging Methodologies for Advancing Naturalistic Inquiry,” Adult Education Research Conference. https://newprairiepress.org/aerc/2013/papers/5

Lipson, S. K., Zhou, S., Abelson, S., Heinze, J., Jirsa, M., Morigney, J., Patterson, A., Singh, M., & Eisenberg, D. (2022). Trends in college student mental health and help-seeking by race/ethnicity: Findings from the National Healthy Minds study, 2013–2021. Journal of Affective Disorders, 306, 138-147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2022.03.038

Lu, Xing and Guo-Ming Chen. (2011)”Language change and value orientations in Chinese culture”. China Media Research, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 56- 63. http://www.wwdw.chinamediaresearch.net/index.php/backissues?id=51

Pedrelli, P., Nyer, M., Yeung, A., Zulauf, C., & Wilens, T. (2015). College Students: Mental Health Problems and Treatment Considerations. Academic Psychiatry: The Journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry, 39(5), 503. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40596-014-0205-9

Toppelberg, C., & Colins, B. A. (2010). Language, culture, and adaptation in immigrant children. PubMed Central (PMC). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526379/

Rüsch, N., Angermeyer, M. C., & Corrigan, P. W. (2005). Mental illness stigma: concepts, consequences, and initiatives to reduce stigma. European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists, 20(8), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2005.04.004

Sharma, D., & Dodsworth, R. (2020). Language variation and social networks. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030524

Shu, J. L., Alleva, J. M., & Stutterheim, S. E. (2022). Perspectives on mental health difficulties amongst second-generation Chinese individuals in Germany: Stigma, acculturation, and help seeking. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 32(6), 1099-1114. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2620

Yin, H., Wardenaar, K.J., Xu, G. et al. Mental health stigma and mental health knowledge in Chinese population: a cross-sectional study. BMC Psychiatry 20, 323 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-020-02705-x

Additional Resources 

https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-impact-of-mental-health-stigma-on-chinese-americans/id539018756?i=1000326453174

https://embed.podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/mental-illness-and-its-cultural-stigma/id1273577192?i=1000420737041

Appendix

Guiding Interview Questions

Defining Mental Health and General Questions

  1. Have you heard of mental health diagnoses? What do you consider as mental health conditions?
  2. How did you learn about the topic of mental health?
  3. Do you know anyone with mental health concerns?
  4. What causes mental health concerns?
  5. How prevalent do you think mental health concerns are within the student population?
  6. What do you think about your own/people’s mental health diagnoses/state?

Family

  1. Do you talk to your family about mental health concerns? Why/why not?
  2. How do you talk to your family about mental health concerns?
  3. Does anyone in your family talk to you about mental health?

Community

  1. Do you talk to your peers about your mental health? Why/why not?
  2. Do your peers talk to you about their mental health? Why/why not?
  3. When talking to your peers/when your peers talk to you about mental health, how do they describe and talk about it?

[/expander_maker]