Social network geometry, linguistic ideologies, and identity negotiation among Latinx English speakers in New Orleans

Abstract

Abstract This article presents an analysis of the role of social networks in shaping patterns of /æ/ realization among Latinxs in Post‐Katrina New Orleans. Social network metrics are shown to be statistically significant predictors of pre‐nasal /æ/ tensing. I argue that social network metrics operationalize important aspects of the sociolinguistic context and contribute to our understanding of factors influencing how Latinx speakers recruit locally significant sociolinguistic variables in linguistic performance. The data and analysis strongly argue against distinctiveness approaches to studies of language and ethnicity, where “racial categories are equated with empirically distinctive sets of linguistic features” (Rosa & Flores, 2017), by demonstrating that Latinx speakers participate in a local change‐in‐progress in ways that are shaped by the same types of sociolinguistic factors that shape linguistic variation generally. The analysis is based on excerpts from a series of interviews conducted with Latinxs in the city (n = 33) in 2017–2018. The interviews were transcribed and coded for tokens of /æ/. Participants were categorized into one of three systems of /æ/ realizations, and tokens of /æ/ were further analyzed using inferential statistics to determine which independent variables were significant predictors of pre‐nasal /æ/ tensing. This research contributes to a growing body of work rejecting distinctiveness approaches to the linguistic performance of minoritized speakers, focusing instead on the ways in which individual speakers recruit linguistic features in the negotiation of identity (Eckert, 2008, 2018; Rosa & Flores, 2017; King 2016, 2018) and helps advance our understanding of how linguistic ideologies and articulations of ethnicity shape linguistic performance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.