Cover not available
Part of
Urban Matters: Current approaches in variationist sociolinguistics
Edited by Arne Ziegler, Stefanie Edler and Georg Oberdorfer
[Studies in Language Variation 27] 2021
► pp. 61–88

Urban/suburban contact as stylized social practice

ORCID logo | Newcastle University
This study highlights the importance of urban/suburban contact to linguistic variation. I explore two case studies of intra-metropolitan contact and their effect on variation in the English of Greater St. Louis, USA. Data comes from 14 white women born 1971–1991 from outer-ring suburbs in St. Charles County who differ in their length of commute, and twelve white women born 1935–1952 from the City of St. Louis who differ in whether they moved to suburbs in adulthood. The results suggest that in contact situations, the city and suburb accommodate to one another: commuting towards the city yields more ʻcity-likeʼ speech, while moving away from the city yields more ʻsuburb-likeʼ speech. However, identity mediates these contact situations through stylized social practice.
Keywords: suburbs, contact, migration, commuting, social practice, Northern Cities Shift, St. Louis
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Contact and identity in metropolitan areas
    • 2.1Migration to suburbs
    • 2.2Commuting to cities
    • 2.3A role for identity?
  • 3.Greater St. Louis
    • 3.1Background
    • 3.2Linguistic features
  • 4.Methods
    • 4.1Interviews
    • 4.2Questionnaire
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Production
    • 5.2Questionnaire
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 16 December 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.27.03dun
References (49)
References
Abrams, Charles. 1955. Forbidden neighbors. A study of prejudice in housing. New York, NY: Harper & Bros.Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas et al. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1), [URL]. (25 July, 2019)
Bauman, Carina. 2013. Social evaluation of Asian accented English. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 19(2). 11–20.Google Scholar
Becker, Kara. 2013. The sociolinguistic interview. In Christine Mallinson, Becky Childs and Gerard Van Herk (eds.), Data collection in sociolinguistics. Methods and applications, 91–100. New York, NY/Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Berger, Bennett M. 1961. The myth of suburbia. Journal of Social Issues 17(1). 38–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2010. Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of taste. Trans. Richard Nice. London/New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brenner, Neil. 2002. Decoding the newest ‘metropolitan regionalism’ in the USA. A critical overview. Cities 19(1). 3–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Britain, David. 2010. Language and space. The variationist approach. In Peter Auer and Jürgen Schmidt (eds.), Language and space. An international handbook of linguistic variation (HSK 30), vol. 2, 142–163. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
. 2013. Space, diffusion, and mobility. In Jack K. Chambers and Natalie Schilling (eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 2nd edn., 471–500. Malden, MA/Oxford/Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle and Seraphim Alvanides. 2013. Employing geographical principles for sampling in state of the art dialectological projects. Journal of Linguistic Geography 1(2). 96–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Driscoll, Anna and Emma Lape. 2015. Reversal of the Northern Cities Shift in Syracuse, New York. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 21(2). 41–47.Google Scholar
Duncan, Daniel. 2018. Language variation and change in the geographies of suburbs. Doctoral thesis. New York: New York University.Google Scholar
. 2019. The influence of suburban development and metropolitan fragmentation on language variation and change. Evidence from Greater St. Louis. Journal of Linguistic Geography 7(2). 82–97. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Secondary education as a group marker in St. Louis, Missouri. Language in Society. DOI logo. (15 January, 2021).Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. 2000. Linguistic variation as social practice. Malden, MA/Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4). 453–476. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Affect, sound symbolism, and variation. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 15(2). 70–80.Google Scholar
Fishman, Robert. 2006. Bourgeois utopias. The rise and fall of suburbia (1987). In Becky M. Nicolaides and Andrew Wiese (eds.), The suburb reader, 33–39. New York, NY/Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fridland, Valerie. 2012. Rebel vowels. How vowel shift patterns are reshaping speech in the modern South. Language and Linguistics Compass 6(3). 183–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Garreau, Joel. 1991. Edge city. Life on the new frontier. New York, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Goodheart, Jill C. 2004. I’m no hoosier. Evidence of the Northern Cities Shift in St. Louis, Missouri. Masterthesis. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University.Google Scholar
Gordon, Colin. 2008. Mapping decline. St. Louis and the fate of the American city. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, Matthew J. 2001. Small-town values and big-city vowels. A study of the Northern Cities Shift in Michigan (Publication of the American Dialect Society 84). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan and Roeland van Hout. 2010. Is Standard Dutch with a regional accent standard or not? Evidence from native speakers’ attitudes. Language Variation and Change 22(2). 221–239. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Horvath, Barbara M. and Ronald J. Horvath. 2001. A multilocality study of a sound change in progress. The case of /l/ vocalization in New Zealand and Australian English. Language Variation and Change 13(1). 37–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. The geolinguistics of /l/ vocalization in Australia and New Zealand. Journal of Sociolinguistics 6(3). 319–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hummon, David M. 1986. City mouse, country mouse. The persistence of community identity. Qualitative Sociology 9(1). 3–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jackson, Kenneth T. 1985. Crabgrass frontier. The suburbanization of the United States. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, Daniel E. 2007. Stability and change along a dialect boundary. The low vowels of Southeastern New England. Doctoral thesis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara. 2004. Place, globalization, and linguistic variation. In Carmen Fought (ed.), Sociolinguistic variation. Critical reflections, 65–83. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kersten, Earl W. and D. Reid Ross. 1968. Clayton. A new metropolitan focus in the St. Louis area. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 58(4). 637–649. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William, Sharon Ash and Charles Boberg. 2006. The atlas of North American English. Phonetics, phonology and sound change. Berlin/New York, NY: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Lambert, Wallace E. et al. 1960. Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60(1). 44–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lichter, Daniel T. and David L. Brown. 2011. Rural America in an urban society. Changing spatial and social boundaries. Annual Review of Sociology 37. 565–592. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lobanov, Boris M. 1971. Classification of Russian vowels spoken by differrent listeners. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 49(2B). 606–608. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Low, Setha M. 2001. The edge and the center. Gated communities and the discourse of urban fear. American Anthropologist 103(1). 45–58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Modan, Gabriella G. 2007. Turf wars. Discourse, diversity and the politics of place (New Directions in Ethnography 1). Malden, MA/Oxford/Carlton: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Muller, Peter O. 1976. The outer city. Geographical consequences of the urbanization of the suburbs (Resource Papers for College Geography 75–2). Washington: Association of American Geographers.Google Scholar
Murray, Thomas E. 2002. Language variation and change in the urban Midwest. The case of St. Louis, Missouri. Language Variation and Change 14(3). 347–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nicolaides, Becky M. and Andrew Wiese (eds.). 2006. The suburb reader. New York, NY/Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Olivo, Ann Marie. 2013. The Strong Island sound. Sociolinguistic evidence for emerging American ethnicities. Doctoral thesis. Houston: Rice University.Google Scholar
Reed, Paul E. 2016. Sounding Appalachian. /aɪ/ monophthongization, rising pitch accents, and rootedness. Doctoral thesis. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina.Google Scholar
Teaford, Jon C. 1997. Post-suburbia. Government and politics in the edge cities. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Erik R. 1997. A rural/metropolitan split in the speech of Texas Anglos. Language Variation and Change 9(3). 309–332. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
United States Census Bureau. 2016. American Community Survey [Supplemental Estimates]: Workers 16 and over who did not work at home. Prepared by Social Explorer. [URL]. (6 June, 2019).
. 2017. American Community Survey [5 Year Estimates]: Population density (per sq. mile). Prepared by Social Explorer. [URL]. (6 June, 2019).
Wagner, Suzanne E. et al. 2016. Reversal and re-organization of the Northern Cities Shift in Michigan. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 22(2). 171–179.Google Scholar
Wikle, Thomas and Guy Bailey. 1997. The spatial diffusion of linguistic features in Oklahoma. Proceedings of the Oklahoma Academy of Science 77. 1–15.Google Scholar
Williams, Barbara R. 1973. St. Louis. A city and its suburbs. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Tamasi, Susan & Lamont Antieau
2023. 12. Social Variation in North American Dialects. Publication of the American Dialect Society 108:1 ► pp. 228 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.