Standard language ideologies: Attitudes toward language varieties

Elizabeth M.

There is comfort and pleasure in traveling to places where you speak the language. Languages have the power to make one feel right at home. As I entered a coffee shop in France, I smelled the wonderful coffee and baked goods. I made my way near the cash register and ordered an americano. My friend living in France had told me that americano was the equivalence for a black coffee in Québec, so I was confident that I would be able to prevent any confusion. My prediction was unfortunately incorrect. The cashier stared at me, squinted his eyes, and paused for a while. I could not tell if he did not understand my order or if he noticed my unfamiliar accent. I repeated my order, a little louder, with less “Québécois”, and made sure to pronounce each and every syllable in my sentence. I felt pretty confident at this point. He continued staring; no words were uttered. He finally said: “Tu es Québécoise? Je suis sûr! J’adore votre accent, c’est si drôle! The barista was very friendly and meant nothing wrong with this remark. I sounded different, which made him smile. We chatted for a while, exchanged warm smiles, and waved goodbye. Throughout my stay in France, redundant remarks, some not so friendly, related to my Québécois accent made it clear to me that there were deeply-rooted attitudes and ideologies related to French of France (FF) and French of Québec (FQ). Standard language ideologies influence how speakers of a language feel about themselves and how they identify with their language community.

The comparison between FQ and FF has been a significant topic for examination in the sociolinguistics field. Who is “better”? Why is one “better”? What does “better” mean? Why are FQ and FF different? What are others’ perceptions of these variations? The ideologies attached to the French language variations reflect the prestige, correctness, and status that is given or declined to FF or FQ. After the Quiet Revolution, a linguistic Québécois identity emerged. This nationalist identity was detached from the rest of Canada and from France (Puska, Jansen & Chalier, 2019). The distinction of the French language in Québec from FF presents various cultural, identity, and linguistic issues. Historically, the standard, the ideal way to speak French has mostly been attributed to FF. Thus, FF has gained most of the prestige, privilege, and advantages over FQ. This significantly affects the ways in which people approach both varieties. For instance, the majority of allophones in Montréal would prefer learning FF than FQ (Guertin, 2018).

How are these privileges maintained and preserved? Lippi-Green (1997:68) contextualizes the language subordination process.

1. The FQ is mystified. « Je comprends vraiment rien! Il faut vraiment être Québécois pour vous comprendre. » I don’t understand anything! You have to be a real Quebecer to understand.
2. The FF claims authority. « Nous sommes les experts, nous parlons « le vrai» français. » We are the experts, we speak « real » French.
3. FQ is trivialized. « Votre accent est si drôle! Je ne suis pas capable de vous prendre au sérieux. » Your accent is so funny! I am not able to take you seriously.”

The issues related to FQ and FF can relate to the duality of native and non-native speakers of English. The dichotomy of native and non-native speakers, of “good” and “bad” language attitudes are deeply embedded in second language teaching and learning contexts. The identities of non-native English speakers are significantly affected by the negative ideologies that are associated with varieties that do not sound “native”. Learners of English as a second language have this idea that to attain a high level of proficiency and competence, they must sound like a native speaker of English. Language myths, assumptions, and long-established beliefs strengthen the cycle of superiority and privilege of native English speakers. Breaking this cycle is easier said than done. In the classroom, teachers play a significant role in ensuring that L2 learners of English feel confident and satisfied with their language abilities, regardless of sounding like a native or non-native speaker of English. By reinforcing this open and inclusive language ideology, students may focus on their proficiency and competence level without comparing it to native-like language models. Individually and collectively, we can break standard language ideologies and embrace language varieties by resisting myths, assumptions, and stereotypes related to languages.

When traveling, languages give a sense of belonging and not belonging. Languages give us a chance to connect, exchange, and identify with communities all around the world. Not just the language itself, but the people that speak and embody it allow us to understand parts of ourselves. Language ideologies and attitudes shape our (mis)understandings of ourselves and others; hence, the importance of demystifying and bringing to light new, more comprehensive alternatives to seeing languages. The dualities of FF and FQ, and native and non-native speakers of English, require further examination and consideration to mend cultural, linguistic, and social gaps. When, or, how are “we” going to stop the perpetuation of “good” and “bad” language attitudes?

References:

Pustka, E., Jansen, L., & Chalier, M. (2019). “C’est toujours l’autre qui a un accent » : Le prestige méconnu des accents du Sud, des Antilles et du Québec. Glottopol, 31, 27-52. 

Guertin, M. (2018). Variation sociophonétique dialectale et stylistique: quelle est la langue cible en français langue seconde à Montréal? Arborescences,  7, 67-89.

Van Herk, G. (2018). What is sociolinguistics? 2e Chichester, West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.