I decided to go with double comparatives because I had heard one of my friends say “much better” and even “more fastest” or “more harder” in a conversation not too long ago. It always made me wonder if it was “more fastest” or was the word, faster " the correct answer. Attitudes seen towards this usage are mostly negative due to prescriptive grammar rules. It seems to be associated with less linguistically aware individuals. Instead of saying, “this is more harder than she expected,” they would point out that it should be “this is harder than she expected.” Now, looking back at it, it appears incorrect since “more” and “er” shouldn’t be used in this sense. Instead, it should just be the suffix, er. 

There are 3 links that provide an explanation of double comparatives. The first link is grammar monster, which explains how using double comparatives such as “er” and “more” together like more taller is considered non standard and incorrect. It provides further insight into what this means, and even goes as far as providing useful examples and ways to avoid it. For instance, it shows many examples of incorrect instances such as “more quicker” or “more wiser.” Using both is considered a serious mistake. I chose it because one word stood out to me: serious. It mentions something serious over and over, which makes me wonder why they would feel that way about such a small error. I personally use double comparatives in my everyday life, and even my friends do, so for the way I speak to be considered “incorrect” is concerning. Saying that it is incorrect usage, my guess is that this means people who are less educated use it. This relates back to the lecture where “one single correct English” is considered a myth, so for double comparatives to be seen as incorrect goes against this notion. As seen in grammar monster, it is clear that double comparative usage is not necessarily associated with a certain social group, but perhaps one that is less conscious of grammar and language. In the Teflpedia dictionary linked, it mentions how even native speakers use it, so it is not necessarily specific to a certain group. It is often identified as incorrect by grammatically conscious individuals, who feel that speaking this way violates basic grammar rules in English; I honestly do not think their dislike is justified since it is such a miniature mistake, and honestly should be overlooked. I don’t necessarily see anyone advocating for its use, unless in a more professional linguistic setting. As mentioned in lecture, opinions concerning non standard words or varieties like double comparatives is in fact, an opinion about those who use it. They might be implying that those who use this- like myself are “deficient.” Also mentioned in lecture is the idea that one single correct English is in fact, a myth which 

The second link is also to a grammarly blog, which mentions how sentences containing "er with more/most are considered incorrect. It also provides an explanation or breakdown of the word, double comparatives and explains briefly why it is wrong. I chose it because it made such an interesting commentary on double comparatives. It mentions that using double comparatives like “more” and “er” together sounds awkward and is not proper English. It would make sense to remove the -er at the end. This hints to the idea that those who use double comparatives like “more” and suffix “er” together are seen as not proper and do not fully understand proper rules of the English language. The blog also hints at the fact that those who use may not speak English as their first langage. I personally disagree since I use it and I’m well educated and speak English quite fluently.  The third link is to the Teflpedia dictionary, which also mentions that double comparatives in sentences is a major error and that is often made by native speakers. It provides a solid explanation of double comparatives. I chose this specific dictionary since it I found it interesting that it contradicts what was said in the precious grammrly blog about people using double comparatives as non English speakers. This dictionary says it is used by native speakers, so this in a way shows how it is even used by educated individuals who are familiar with English grammatical rules. This does not advocate for its use, but it does show that it is used by native English speakers, so it isn’t entirely taboo or incorrect if it is used by a majority of people.   

It also relates back to the idea that the standard language is often that of a majority group of people in power; this is different since now, the dictionary is mentioning that this “grammatical error” is used by native speakers or majority English speakers. 

T Deletion in English- Sound

I decided to choose /t/ deletion in English, which I’ve heard one of my professors actually mention in a previous linguistics class. They have also said it a few times on occasion. I think they were from the Midwest, definitely not from New York. For instance, they’ve said “internet” pronounced as “inner-net” where the /t/ is often silent; another word I’ve heard before is “better” versus “be’er” or water pronounced as “wa’er.” Words with the /t/ deletion seem to be associated with informal speech and those without that deletion are used in professional settings. This is usually prevalent among younger generations such as Gen Z and might even span to perhaps Gen X. It could also be due to dialects of people from regions such as the Midwest/South like in my professor's case. My professor included /t/ deletion on multiple occasions while she was lecturing, and I’ve also heard my friends say certain words like water and internet with t/deletion, who were also originally from the South. Typically, the variant that has /t/ pronunciation is typically more acceptable to use in professional settings like in a job interview or meeting while the variant without /t/ is used in informal settings, or settings where the individual feels comfortable speaking that way. Personally, I use /t/ deletion alot in my everyday language and conversationally; I find it easier to pronounce most of these words that way. It feels more relaxed and comfortable for me to speak that way. I don’t think I would use standard t/ pronunciation unless I was in a formal setting like academic or a job interview, for instance. 

There are 2 videos linked that provide an explanation of  t/deletion and show them be spoken in a conversation. The first video, Dropped T/D Sounds in English is an explanation of how certain words appear when T is dropped or deleted, which is the first variant. At 0:10, the woman mentions “internet” and how it can be pronounced as “inner-net.” She repeats it multiple times. At 3:18, she provides another example: lighting, and how it can be pronounced as “lighn-ing.” I chose this specific video since it does a good job of proving solid examples of t/ deletion, and also because the woman in the video mentions that t/ deletion is actually more common than expected. There were a few examples such as wrestle and Christmas. What stood out to me was the explanation of “Christmas” and how /t/ is deleted, and that was actually very common in everyday language. I chose this specific video because it explains how there isn’t a specific social group that uses t/ deletion, and that is actually very common among native speakers. It goes on to explain that native speakers actually use t/ deletion more than they realize, in words such as wrestle, whistle etc at 1:40. I find this interesting because I’ve heard a few of my professors actually pronounce water with t/ deletion, and even lightning without the t. This relates back to the lecture, where it was mentioned how it was all different ways of saying the same thing, but had different social connotations. For my professor versus my friend, it might have had different social connotations, to say in lecture versus with one's friends. My professor was also from the Midwest and he was also raised there most of his life. Perhaps being raised there contributed to the social connotations of t/deletion when he spoke. One thing that this video also pointed out was that there wasn’t a certain group that used since this t/ deletion was actually very common. I found that interesting since I thought it had more to do with background or maybe dialect since my Midwest professor was using this a lot.

The second video, /t/- English Pronounication- Dropping Sounds provided a thoughtful explanation focusing mainly on the second variant, which was t/ pronounced/standard pronunciation. She also provides an example of the standard variant with t/ pronounced at 3:50. She explains that there are also words such as interactive and international, where the t/ is heard. Like the variant with t/ deletion, the one with t/ pronunciation is also just as common. This data also mentions that using either variant is not really more acceptable than the other, even in professional versus informal contexts. Even in formal settings like with my professors, t/ deletion variant was used. This relates back to the lecture about the speakers’ choices between the variants in a linguistic variable, which in this case is t/ deletion; in this scenario, the data shows that these specific variants are in fact, not tied to a specific social group and are very common among native speakers such as myself. I personally speak using both variants, but for me, it depends on the setting that I am in or even who I am with at the moment. I like to use the first variant with t/ deletion when I am with friends, but when I am in an academic setting, I would use the second variant.

I think the community it is targeting is the majority Hispanic Spanish speaking population. Washington Heights has historically been a majority hispanic neighborhood since the 1900s which is why it’s common to see Spanish in signs everywhere. The advertiser chose the language they did as a deliberate choice to cater to the predominantly Hispanic population, and to resonate with the linguistic and cultural preferences of that local community. The effects it was intended to have was to communicate to potential customers that this restaurant caters to their specific cultural and linguistic needs, and to ensure this strong connection between its Spanish speaking population in a neighborhood like Washington Heights. 

The second photo was an MTA nyc bus passing by, which I usually take to campus. It had a “La Mujer Diablo” advertisement for a movie. It was in Spanish instead of English, and even the description beneath was also in Spanish. It showed two characters from the movie plastered near the title. The reason I chose this specific advertisement was because I thought that it was such a clever place to place it especially in a majority Hispanic neighborhood like Washington Heights. I also use the MTA buses a lot, so it was definitely interesting to see this sign plastered all over these buses. It was actually not the first time I had seen this specific advertisement since the MTA did this all the time. I saw this very same sign on multiple buses passing by. They used Spanish translations on their ads all over buses to evoke this connection to the cultural heritage of the neighborhood, thereby attracting Hispanic customers. It targets the majority Hispanic Spanish speaking population in Washington Heights, which was where the neighborhood this bus was passing through. It also targeted the Mexican and Colombian majority population in this neighborhood as well. This relates to what was mentioned in lecture, which was dialectology principles that catered to regional linguistic variation. In the context of Washington Heights, which has a significant Hispanic population, including Mexican and Colombian communities, the advertisement strategically utilizes Spanish language to target the linguistic preferences of the local population. This aligns with dialectological research, which suggests that regional language varieties develop and persist due to historical, social, and cultural factors within specific geographic regions.

The reason the advertiser chose this specific language was because Washington Heights has historically been a majority Hispanic speaking neighborhood since the 1900s. By using Spanish, the advertiser aims to connect with the cultural heritage and linguistic identity of this local population, which created this sense of resonance and familiarity. The effect it was intended to have was to draw in the attention of Spanish speakers. The MTA buses are also used by a lot of residents, mostly whom are Spanish speaking, which also helped to create this awareness for the “La Mujer Diabo” movie, which translated to English means “the Women Devil.” 

African American Vernacular: AIN’T

I chose the word, ain’t because I’ve heard it used in so many different scenarios in my life. I have even heard my professor from my AAVE linguistics class from last year use it in class during one of her lectures. It is typically considered a nonstandard variant for “are not” or “am not.” I have also heard it being used in songs before. It exemplifies covert prestige since it is used in a way that is not standard, but considered prestige. An example of this is in the song, “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough” by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terell. Ain’t is heard at 0:30, 0:40, 1:03, repeatedly throughout the song. I chose this specific song because I thought it showed a great example of covert prestige of the word, ain’t. It is also a particularly popular song that has been around for ages, and I personally thought that the use of this nonstandard variant contributed to the song’s overall appeal. For context, it is about two lovers who believe that nothing can get in their way, or stop them from loving each other, not even a mountain or any kind of weather. Ain’t is used repeatedly throughout the song. 

Evidently, this usage of a nonstandard word multiple times throughout the song communicates this cultural authenticity, rawness and emotional intensity. This shows this great level of prestige in popular music and rap. The negative attributes associated with the variant are that it is not proper English due to being grammatically incorrect; meanwhile, the positive attribute is how it conveys a sense of authenticity and cultural identity, especially in certain regional dialects. The user is trying to show this emotional intensity, and by using the variant, ain’t, it shows the strength of love between the two characters in the music video, and how “ain’t nothing” is enough to separate them, or their love. I personally thought that it worked since it shows their love for one another, and how “ain’t nothing” getting in the way. The use of this variant is evidently valued and desirable in music like this, and communicates authenticity. This connects back to what was said in lecture about status, and the amount of respect accorded to the person. In this scenario, this music artist had a lot of respect, and high status. Their use of ain’t reflected their status as influential figures in music. 

Another song where the variant, ain’t is heard is “Ain’t No Sunshine” by Bill Withers. 

I chose this particular song because it is a solid example of covert prestige of this variant especially, in the music industry. It also uses it multiple times throughout the song, and does so in such an authentic, raw way; it shows great cultural significance. 

For context, it describes the feelings of longing and sadness one experiences when their lover is not around. The lyrics uses “ain’t” a lot at 0:02-0:10 and how “ain’t sunshine when she goes…”....”ain’t no breath….” to describe how he feels when his lover leaves. This variant exemplifies covert prestige since it uses this nonstandard variant to emphaisze his feelings, which contributes to the song’s overall appeal. This shows how this specific word has taken on a certain level of prestige in the context of the song; in fact, it would not sound the same if that variant were removed from the song. The negative attributes associated with ain’t include that it is nonstandard English, and is not proper grammar; however, positive attributes include its autnehticity and how it adds this emotional tone that is impactful. 

I think the user is trying to communciate his raw feelings and a sense of authenticity when they use this variant in their song. It has transformed their song to one that has an emotional intensity. I definitely do think that it worked since it added meaning to the song’s overall message. It added this emotional tone to the lyrics. This relates to what was said in lecture about language change, and how usage of ain’t reflects change; while it is nonstandard, it has been widely accepted in certain contexts such as in music where it conveys this sense of authenticity.

The second word chosen was internet, which seemed to show an increasing trend. I chose this specific word because I felt that it would represent this strong technological shift that had a profound impact on society. According to the ngram graph, there was an obvious increasing shift. I think it shows this trajectory because of technological advancements and cultural shifts. The adoption and increasing importance of the internet for communication led to increasing usage of this word. It has now become a central aspect of modern society, and is increasingly being used. I personally hear it being used on a day to day basis. For instance, my professors deal with technology issues and internet connections, and so this specific word is used multiple times. I believe this change reflects technological shifts coming into being/ gaining importance. The widespread apdotpom of the internet and increasing importance of digital communication led to this increasing trajectory. This also correlates with this shift, where digital technologies and online platforms such as Facebok also gained prominence during this time. This relates to what was mentioned in lecture about how speakers changed language; sociolinguistics study language change in its social context, and the increasing usage of “internet” is a prime example of how it is affected by external factors such as cultural shifts and technological advancements. As new technologies and concepts emerge, language evolves to accommodate these changes. Internet has no wbecome a common term in the English language. 

The third word chosen was beehive, which showed a fad, or a single prominent peek. The reason this specific ngram was chosen was because it showed this prominent peak in the graph, which reflected this “fad or trend” at the time. I have only heard it once, and that was back in high school by one of my science teachers. I feel like nowadays, it is not a very common word to come across.

 According to the ngram graph, this peak correlates to a trend in the 1960s most likely, when this was seen as a popular hairstyle. However, as time went on, it slowly began losing popularity and used less. The change in usage is most likely due to cultural shifts and fashion trends. It reflects a mix of language-internal change and external changes like cultural shifts and fashion trends. The peak use of beehive showed this cultural trend, but as the hairstyle lost popularity, so did its usage. This trajectory showed the dynamic nature of fashion and cultural trends.

 I chose the Guardian newspaper because it examines this common perception of how women talk more than men and delves into its complexities. It talks about how men interrupt women more frequently when converdating, which relates to power dynamics and gender linguistic inequality.  In terms of linguistic merit, this newspaper focuses on the phenomen of men interrupting women in conversation and why that seems to happen. It makes a lot of references to linguistic behaviors such as interruption frequency and conversational dominance. I think it relates more to Lakoff’s dominance model simply because it shows this relationship between certain linguistic behaviors and how it reflects power dynamics and power imbalance especially in conversation and societal norms. It demonstrates this by discussing how power imbalances are inherent in gendered language norms as proposed by this dominance model. 

Per Lakoff’s domiance theory, women often adopt linguistic patterns that make them subordinate, leading to situations where men often interrupt them as mentioned in the article. Quantitative evidence was used which I felt was convincing since it included expert analysis and anecdotal stories. I personally think that the newspaper was not biased in any way and even provided expert analysis and a clear, solid view on the issue of gendered interruption. It gives this perspective from every angle. This newspaper relates to what was said in class about gender preferential linguistic differences and highlights how societal expectations and gender norms influence communication patterns. It also relates back to how language directly and indirectly indexes gender and hw linguistic behaviors serve as makers of gender identity and reinforce societal perceptions of gender roles. By addressing this, the newspaper sheds light on the ways language can perpectuate certain gender inequalities.

The second newspaper chosen was probably my favorite one: "Women Get Punished More Than Men for a Common Speech Mannerism: Vocal Frys” by Julia Reinstein. I chose this specific article because it discusses vocal fry in women’s speech (a linguistic phenmomen) and that it is perceived differently based on gender. Quantitive evidence doesn’t seem to be used, but there is extensive anedotal evidence that supports Reinstein’s argument. This newspaper aligns with Tannen’s difference model; it highlights gendered differences in the perception of vocal fry. It also mentions that women are disproportionately penalized for using vocal fry in comparison to men which reflected major societal bias. I believe there was some bias seen in the newspaper, as it was written by a woman and mentioned that this common speech style was unfairly punished in women’s speech or when they talk. It talks more about women’s injustice and doesn’t really give a full perspective of men and their role in this and provides few male ancetodals. This relates to what was mentioned in lecture about gender preferential linguistic differences, and how vocal fry often seen as a gendered speech mannerism which leads to women seeing disproportionate criticism for it in comparison to their counterparts. 

I also think that it added a bit of an emotional touch to it, which communicated to my friend that I was very amused by it. I felt its use was successful since my friend responded back saying she was glad I liked it. The second one I chose was phatic, which was an email saying “hey, long time no see ! How have you been 😂. The reason I chose this was because it is used phatically to show that there is a friendly informal tone in the email when emails are typically formal. It also showed to the person receiving the email that I meant to greet them in a friendly way, and that I did not expect a formal response back. I think it was successful since the response back was also friendly and definitely not formal. This helped establish this social relationship, or in this case, phatic communication. This also served as this nonverbal cue that showed the individual how I was trying to be friendly and open the way for a conversation. This relates to the topic of politeness norms since it’s a social interaction that creates these friendly, open relationsips. For instance, the use of the laughing emoji helped to convey respect or even friendlessness as in the email between me and the other person. The emoji mostly relates to politeness norms since it adds warmth and friendliness overall to the email, especially since emails are mostly seen as formal. I wouldn’t have been able to convey this friendless email had I not incorporated that laughing emoji there. 

For the directive, I included a screenshot of a text mentioning “I can't believe I tripped in front of everyone at the party 😂.” The reason I chose this specific emoji was because it was used in a directive way that would help downplay my embarrassment in this situation. I was also looking for a specific response from that friend which used that emoji. I believe it was successful since that person responded back with reassurance which was the specific response I had originally intended.  Clearly, I was embarrassed about what had happened at the party that day, and was texting my friend to make myself feel better. I did so by including a laughing emoji to soften the mood and atmosphere, and also to indirectly encourage my friend to reply back with humor or at least to make me feel better. This relates to the topic of communicative competence due to the fact that it involves using language according to the specific social situation one is; this applies to text and digital communication words. In this specific scenario, using this emoji was a nonverbal cue or communication to the person receiving the text. 

I also think that it added a bit of an emotional touch to it, which communicated to my friend that I was very amused by it. I felt its use was successful since my friend responded back saying she was glad I liked it. The second one I chose was phatic, which was an email saying “hey, long time no chat ! How's life 😂. The reason I chose this was because it is used phatically to show that there is a friendly informal tone in the email when emails are typically formal. It also showed to the person receiving the email that I meant to greet them in a friendly way, and that I did not expect a formal response back. I think it was successful since the response back was also friendly and definitely not formal. This helped establish this social relationship, or in this case, phatic communication. This also served as this nonverbal cue that showed the individual how I was trying to be friendly and open the way for a conversation. This relates to the topic of politeness norms since it’s a social interaction that creates these friendly, open relationsips. For instance, the use of the laughing emoji helped to convey respect or even friendlessness as in the email between me and the other person. The emoji mostly relates to politeness norms since it adds warmth and friendliness overall to the email, especially since emails are mostly seen as formal. I wouldn’t have been able to convey this friendless email had I not incorporated that laughing emoji there. 

For the directive, I included a screenshot of a text mentioning “I can't believe I tripped in front of everyone at the party 😂.” The reason I chose this specific emoji was because it was used in a directive way that would help downplay my embarrassment in this situation. I was also looking for a specific response from that friend which used that emoji. I believe it was successful since that person responded back with reassurance which was the specific response I had originally intended.  Clearly, I was embarrassed about what had happened at the party that day, and was texting my friend to make myself feel better. I did so by including a laughing emoji to soften the mood and atmosphere, and also to indirectly encourage my friend to reply back with humor or at least to make me feel better. This relates to the topic of communicative competence due to the fact that it involves using language according to the specific social situation one is; this applies to text and digital communication words. In this specific scenario, using this emoji was a nonverbal cue or communication to the person receiving the text.