Category: Youth language

The impact of English as a second language in the construction of youth identity in Europe

By Doni Ebongue & Rebeca Negash

Classroom
Image free of copyright: www.flickr.com

In this blog entry, we will investigate, from a sociolinguistic perspective, the impact that English as a second language has in the construction of the identity of high schoolers aged between thirteen and eighteen years old in Europe. We will consider the main techniques that adolescents use to create and model their linguistic repertoire, such as code-switching and language mixing. In addition, we will observe that the creation of their multilingual identity is influenced by many sources like CMC and CMD, globalization, academical success, music or video games.

Keywords: multilingualism, Europe, youth language, code-switching, language identity, repertoire, CMC

Introduction

While the Statista Research Department stated that in 2019 English was the most spoken language in the world either spoken natively or as a second language (Statista Research Department, Nov 27, 2020), there are still more non-native speakers of English in the world than native ones (Leppänen and Peuronen 2012). Therefore, this language is present everywhere: in social media, in advertisements, at schools, at work, etc. It has become such an important language that most academic institutions have included the learning of English as a mandatory subject. Considering that young people construct their personal and social identity during their teenage years, one might wonder what impact the learning of English has from a social perspective, on the creation and development of their multilingual identity and from a linguistical perspective, on the formation of their personal repertoire. Therefore, through a social approach to multilingualism some key concepts will be defined in order to open a discussion on the effect the practice of English as a second language in Europe has and its role in the multilingual identity performances of adolescents aged between 13 to 18 years old. 

While the Statista Research Department stated that in 2019 English was the most spoken language in the world either spoken natively or as a second language (Statista Research Department, Nov 27, 2020), there are still more non-native speakers of English in the world than native ones (Leppänen and Peuronen 2012). Therefore, this language is present everywhere: in social media, in advertisements, at schools, at work, etc. It has become such an important language that most academic institutions have included the learning of English as a mandatory subject. Considering that young people construct their personal and social identity during their teenage years, one might wonder what impact the learning of English has from a social perspective, on the creation and development of their multilingual identity and from a linguistical perspective, on the formation of their personal repertoire. Therefore, through a social approach to multilingualism some key concepts will be defined in order to open a discussion on the effect the practice of English as a second language in Europe has and its role in the multilingual identity performances of adolescents aged between 13 to 18 years old. 

Theoretical framework

As we will focus on the effect that English has in the construction of young people’s multilingual identity in Europe, we will try to determine whether there are any differences between the English variety that European teens use at home and the one they use in a formal educational context. For example, Grau (2009) makes a distinction between those two speeches by saying “that the use of English in young people’s free time can differ immensely from the English used in school” (Grau, 2009: 161).  In order to do so, we will need to clarify a few important concepts that will be developed later in this paper

First, it is important to define the notion of “repertoire”, which is to be opposed to the notion of “language” as a bounded system. The notion of language is to be considered as a conventional, standardized communication system that humans use orally (speaking) or manually (writing) to interact with each other. According to Bristowe, Oostendorp & Anthonissen, the notion of repertoire can be characterized as follows:  somebody’s repertoire represents every resource that this person uses in order to communicate.

The notion of code-switching needs to be also developed, as this concept represents one of the most important features of young people’s use of different languages. Code-switching is realized by using features of more than one language in the same conversation (Deumert 2011). An example of code-switching from French to English would be an expression like “Je ne suis pas dans un bon mood tonight”. The basis language is French and some words were changed by English ones, possibly because this new expression sounds better in the speaker’s opinion. Another feature used by multilingual people is the notion of language mixing which differs from code-switching. While code-switching replaces a few words of the basis language by words of a different language, language mixing represents the actual use of a foreign language instead of the basis language. For example, in a class about American literature in Germany, the usage of English would be considered as language mixing since students would be speaking only in English, a foreign language, with each other instead of German, their mother tongue.Finally, it is important to define which sources have the more influence on young people’s multilingualism. According to Grau (2009), there are three main factors that have a crucial effect on European youth’s contact with English: “the media, personal networks (friends and family), and intercultural contacts through travelling” (Grau, 2009: 163). As mentioned above, there can be a big difference between the English spoken at home or with friends and the one spoken at school, or “school English” as Grau (2009) describes it (which is a translation of the German word Schulenglisch). Following Leppänen and Peuronen’s work, we will differentiate the notions of CMC (computer-mediated communication) and CMD (computer-mediated discourse). While CMC refers “to interaction that occurs via computer-mediated formats”, CMD “refers to all the different kinds of interpersonal communication carried out on the Internet” (Leppänen and Peuronen 2012). The difference between those two concepts is rather simple, as it is very similar to the notions of “repertoire” versus “language” explained before, where CMC represents the language, and CMD is the repertoire.

Literature review

In this section, we will take a look on previous research regarding the effect of English on youth in Europe and its impact on the construction of their multilingual identity. The studies have been categorized in three themes: language & identity, context choice of English and influence of English in the construction of youth language.

Language & Identity

Exploration is a term that well defines the adolescence period. Indeed, it is a time where boys and girls try, adapt, accept and reject many norms in order to construct their identity. Among their areas of experimentation, they also investigate the limitlessness of language. Through language, young people, in particular, try to express their identity. As a matter of fact, linguistic variation which is “the coexistence of several ways to express a message with the same referential context” (Nortier 2018: 5) is commonly used by teenagers. From this definition, it is understandable that the choice of a linguistic form is never neutral. It is a reflective process that depends on one’s own repertoire, on the identity he or she wants to be associated with and the identity he or she identifies with. Since identity is formed by the self and the others, language can be perceived as an “act of identity” (LePage and Tabouret-Keller 1985 and Auer 2005, as quoted in Nortier 2018: 6). For instance, a same variant can be used differently depending on the context and on what the speaker wants to share about himself or herself. In order to show belonging to a certain group, teenagers are innovative in terms of language. More than other generations, they borrow words from other languages, mix them with their own mother tongue, create new words, adapt the linguistic rules of a standard language, etc. As they investigate the many possibilities that a standard language has to offer and they create their personal repertoire, they succeed in creating their own identity and thus, differentiate themselves from other people and groups. Moore’s study of two groups of high school girls focuses on the distinctive usage of the same variant to create their own repertoire and thus, demarcate themselves from the other group (Moore 2004). Thus, through what Nortier names languaging, youths construct their repertoires from various sources (Nortier 2018: 6). In her paper about young people in multilingual area, Nortier also mentions the term enregisterment which was developed by Agha to determine the “process by which a linguistic repertoire comes to be associated with particular social practices and with the people who engage in such practices” (Agha 2003, as quoted in Nortier 2018: 7). As the interest in youth language is increasing and its vocabulary is more and more developed, it is safe to say that language plays an important role in the creation of personal and social identity.

Context choice of English

Since youth is “a flexible and contestable social category that can be variously reproduced in different social and cultural contexts” (Leppänen 2007: 151), looking at their language practices is one approach to understanding the construction of their identity. From this point of view, their language choice is seen as a social and cultural linguistic “act of identity”. Consciously or unconsciously, every action is the result of a choice. Thus, the use of a specific language or certain linguistic features is also a choice made by the speaker. Among the reasons that might support this decision are the context of speech and the topic discussed. Young people, like other generations, often use English even though it might not be their mother tongue. It can be used as a lingua franca, that is a shared medium of communication between speakers of different languages, in alternation with their primary language, in code-switching as defined earlier or simply in the borrowing of some words. Leppänen and Peuronen (2012) noted that, in the case of CMC, the recourse to another language had multiple effects. English, for example, could be used in the creation of a communicative style of its own, for stylistic or narrative purposes, for clarification, or even help in “the negotiation of identity and communality” (Leppänen and Peuronen 2012: 388). In conclusion, English is linked to a sociolinguistic change, since it has an impact on most youth’s repertoire but also to a social and cultural one, as it also has an influence on the construction of their identity.

Influence of English in the construction of youth language

While English is essentially learned at school, teenagers also developed this language outside of this institution through other English resources, such as TV, internet, music, etc. Additionally, English appears in CMC and young people interact with it. Nevertheless, it seems that teachers do not consider their speaking or writing skills to have improved since schools are expecting a monolingual standard variety of English that those resources do not provide. However, as teenagers are anyway exposed to non-academic English in various contexts, they use it to innovate and model their own repertoire. Therefore, English takes an important role not only in schooling but also in the pupils’ free time.

As CMC is increasingly more present in people’s life, linguists have been interested in its impact on youth language. While in CMC multiple languages can interact with each other, some language features are revised and/or adapted to the CMC context which render difficult to fully acquire a language. Nevertheless, Stæhr and Madsen (2015) have pointed out that, in a few cases, CMC can also help youth to stick to and master a standard language. Indeed, in a research on adolescents in Copenhagen, they realized that teenagers increasingly used more monolingual, standard linguistic practices in their hip-hop productions on YouTube. The reason for their monolingual rap is due to the influence of their local rap mentor, the “hegemonic language ideological beliefs linking linguistics standard and correctness to intelligence”, their consideration for their audience and their ambitions to be a successful musician. What is interesting here is that rap and the resources around it (mentors, videos, songs, etc.) are being used to master a language. Indeed, the adolescents claim that if they want to be listened to they need to rap and speak in standard English. Their message is more powerful if their grammar is correct, thus they associate rap with formal education. While this study showed the advantage of CMC on mastering a language, this is not usually the case.

Thus, even though the type of English youth encounter outside of the academic institution does not significantly improve their speaking or writing skills as teachers would like to, it still plays an important role in the development of the individual. Depending on the kind of English resources and varieties teenagers want to interact with, thus in selecting a certain variety (standard vs. non-standard), they unconsciously shape their identity around it. As Berns and de Bot state (2005) “different language and media environments shape different kinds of English proficiency” (Berns and de Bot 2005, as quoted in Maike 2009: 171).

Discussion

As seen in previous studies, the practice of English in Europe has an effect on youth and plays a role in the construction of their multilingual identity. Indeed, according to Grau (2009) “A number of research reports focusing on youth cultures have emphasised the important role of English for young Europeans” (Grau 2009, 161). Teenagers give English learning a really meaningful importance and tend to speak a more formal, more standardized English in an academic context, while in their free time their English would be more vernacular, more popular. As mentioned earlier, the standard monolingual English expected at school would here represent the concept of “language-mixing”, whereas the “free-time English” would be more prone to code-switching, using English words to replace others of the basis language in a sentence. In his analysis of young people in Denmark, Preisler (1999) “even suggests the terms “English from above” for the English that teenagers use in the institutionalised setting of language classes at school, versus “English from below” for the English they use in their spare time” (Preisler 1999, as quoted in Grau 2009, 161). Of course, in their free time, teenagers in non-English speaking contexts are confronted to this language mostly through CMC. For instance, in video games where English is usually the main language used by the players, or through what is called “language SMS” in French (texting language) where the use of code-switching is high. Also, we can see that the English languages in general (either General American English, British English or other varieties) have a huge impact on youth language with the success of American movies in particular, series and music. Hip-hop for example, which is originally associated to American lower-classes, represents one of the most popular music genres listened to by teenagers and therefore constitutes a rich source of exposure to English for young people. As Leppänen reports in her analysis of Finnish teenagers, “In, for example, subcultural activities and lifestyle communities centred around some shared interest (e.g. musical style) or activity (e.g. skateboarding) English functions as an additional language, mixing and alternating with Finnish” (Leppänen, 2007: 149).

Also, the use of English for young European L2 speakers is associated to one’s own creation of a personal identity, and induces a feeling of belonging in a specific youth culture. Leppänen claims that “In the younger generations this positive allegiance with the West has shown, for example, in their willingness to study Western foreign languages, particularly English” (Leppänen, 2007: 150). With the rise of globalisation and internationalisation in the economic department as well as social interactions becoming worldwide with the invention of Internet in the 20th century, younger generations seem to have a closer relation toward English for various reasons, such as social interactions with people from different countries as well as academic success, since English became the main language used in international exchange, global economy, and therefore allow students to travel and sometimes establish themselves abroad. The English language has also become a marker of appurtenance to a certain culture, for:

“in many other European countries the choice and use of English is also increasingly a key aspect of youth language. Importantly, it has been claimed by a number of researchers that there is often an association between belonging to the youth culture and using English, either along with or mixed with the native language”

(Leppänen, 2007: 151)

All across Europe, English has now become a main language in the areas mentioned earlier and its spreading across Europe shows how young people develop their speech and widen their repertoires as they give more and more importance to English. 

Limitations

It is impossible to determine one fixed repertoire, or one fixed CMD (especially in a media approach) for language is ever-changing, and so is one’s repertoire. The Internet, for example, used to be governed by English. But with time, other languages have started to gain in usage on the web, such as Cantonese and Spanish. With the growth of internationalisation and globalisation, the access to information in one’s home language is much frequent than in the preceding century. Additionally, considering the fact that new generations are more and more present on the Internet, this allows small communities to appear and therefore add new features to people’s repertoire. Also, if we focus once again on Europe, there are mostly L2 speaking countries regarding English, and within the borders of a country not everybody possesses the same level of English, even for younger generations. The preview studies therefore used to focus on a specific group of people, people with a certain level of English available for their repertoire. The level of education is also crucial when analysing young people’s speech in English. While it was not an issue for research concerning secondary education, in higher education teens would have a better proficiency in English than others, which would indubitably have an effect on the resources they have and will use.

Possible future directions

New studies could analyse the evolution of the differentiation between “school English” and “outside school English”. As defined earlier, the interactions that teenagers entertain with the media, their friends and family and with travel has had a deep influence on their repertoires. However, considering once again the notion of “repertoire” as ever-changing, future research might notice any new feature in the following generations.

References

  • Bristowe, Anthea and Marcelyn, Oostendorp and Christine, Anthonissen. 2014. Language and youth identity in a multilingual setting: A multimodal repertoire approach. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 32:2, 229-245.
  • Faas, Daniel. 2007. Youth, Europe and the Nation: The Political Knowledge, Interests and Identities of the New Generation of European Youth. Journal of Youth Studies 10:2, 161-181.
  • Hoffmann, C. 2000. The Spread of English and the Growth of Multilingualism with English in Europe. In J. Cenoz, & U. Jessner (Eds.), English in Europe: The Acquisition of a Third Language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 1-21.
  • Kerswill, Paul. 2013. Identity, ethnicity and place: the construction of youth language in London. In Auer, Peter, Hilpert, Martin, Stukenbrock, Anja and Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt (Eds.), Space in language and linguistics. linguae and litterae. Walter de Gruyter, 128-164. 
  • Leppänen, Sirpa and Saija, Peuronen. 2012. Multilingualism on the Internet. In Marilyn Martin-Jones, Adrian Blackledge and Angela Creese (Eds.), Handbook of Multilingualism. London: Routledge, 384-402.
  • Leppänen, Sirpa. 2007. Youth Language in Media Contexts: Insights into the Functions of English in Finland. World Englishes 26: 2, 149-169.
  • Maike Grau. 2009. Worlds apart? English in German youth cultures and in educational settings. World Englishes 28:2, 160-174.
  • Moore, Emma. 2004. Sociolinguistic Style: A Multidimensional Resource for Shared Identity Creation. Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique 49:3-4, 375-396.
  • Nortier, Jacomine. 2018. Language and Identity Practices among Multilingual Western European Youths. Language and Linguistics Compass 12:5.
  • Stæhr, Andreas and Lian Malai Madsen. 2015. Standard language in urban rap: Social media, linguistic practice and ethnographic context. Language & Communication 40, 67-81.

The impact of migration on youth language

Linda Dridi

In this blog entry, I investigate how migration has impacted teenagers from the Western World and their manner of speaking, more specifically their vocabulary. The purpose of this blog is to show how a research on youth language should not only focus on ethnicity, due to its flexible place in the construction of youth language, but also on other factors such as the environment, age, gender, social class, or level of education. Each of these factors is closely linked with each other and plays an important role for a young person.

Keywords: youth language – young people – migration – ethnicity

Image free of copyright: https://search.creativecommons.org/

1. Introduction

In today’s society, human migration is better known under the term of immigration and it consists in people, generally from developing countries moving to developed countries for different reasons such as better professional opportunities, healthcare needs, political reasons or safety. These people then build their lives in their new home and also build families. Their children are then surrounded by two or more cultures, that transmitted by their parents and that from the country they live in. They are also surrounded, from a young age, by a variety of languages and cultures, which can also have an important impact on their language.

  This blog entry will focus on youth language but more specifically on how the migration of the parents have impacted the language youth, especially those of migration descent. An example of an impact of migration of language can be seen for example in youth language in France. Indeed, they have, for example, translated Arabic insults literally in French (for example, the French insult fils de chien is taken from the Arabic expression weld el kelb)These translations of insults are nowadays used by most of the Francophones, leading then the French vocabulary to broaden.

To have a better understanding of how migration plays an important role in the development of youth language, I will present studies made in France and the United Kingdom which observe the manner of speaking and linguistic production of young people, from the 2nd generation of migrant, coming from India, Turkey or North Africa in purpose to have a better understanding on how youth language is built. Thus, this blog entry will focus on language and how migration has impacted youth language and built their vocabularies.

2. Theoretical framework

Youth language is highly stereotyped as it is perceived as a “hood”, “street” or “ghetto” language, spoken by non-educated people or a broader repertoire. These stereotypes are mainly linked with racist ideologies due to the personal backgrounds of their speakers. Indeed, most of the young people speaking a “youth language” are the descendants of immigrant parents. This difference of culture led some people to consider young people and their language as poor compared to the standard language.

 Besides this heritage of language and culture, the spread of globalization, which is the circulation of people, merch or services all around the world, has an important impact in youth language as it influences their manner of speaking. The spread of the Internet, for example, has allowed young people to be surrounded with even more languages and thus incorporate them into their language practices.

Young people have also presented many particular elements in their language. Indeed, some of them show a performance of identity, which consists of an act of identity, in our case the culture of their immigrated parents, by using, for example, some vocabulary from their mother tongue. This incorporation of foreign vocabulary can also be defined by the term of borrowing. Others tend to acculturate themselves, which means that they adjust themselves to the culture of the country they live in, putting aside their parents’ culture.

Thus, migration has an important repercussion on young people and their manner of speaking and it will be thus interesting to have a better understanding on its impact and how young people manage to use the languages that surround them.

3. Research related to youth language

Bucholtz and Skapoulli (2009) have explored the linguistic production of youth language through the theme of cultural mobility. The purposes of this study were firstly to understand the impact of migration, transnationalism and globalization on young people and secondly how their identities were emerging from their language. As young people from the 2nd generation of migrant are usually navigating between different cultures, their identities are influenced by them. It is thus important to take in account the sociocultural context in youth studies in general. As immigrants were usually seen as “outsiders”, ideologies usually tend to divide their culture apart from the culture of the country they live in. Therefore, young people from the 2nd generation of migrant counteract this ideology by claiming that they own multiple cultures. The impact of migration, transnationalism and globalization has been extremely important among young people, especially in their language as they are mainly known for being innovators and breakers of language rules.

Svendsen (2015) compares a range of linguistic practices among young people from linguistically and culturally diverse areas, in order to have a better understanding on how youth language works in the 21st century. She explains that the increased global mobility, but also the tourism or the technological advances have an important impact on the language. It is among young people that we can see changes in languages due to the surroundings of mixed culture and social backgrounds. Their identity is mainly linked with the linguistic form and language used, which must be taken in consideration while investing youth language.

Shankar (2011) decided to base her research on style, considering it as a linguistic and cultural notion that allows people, in the case of her study immigrant youth, to perform identity. She had focused her studies with two group of young people from Desi culture (which is the south Asian culture) who live in the United States, more precisely in California. She considers two class backgrounds from the new immigration (which refers to immigrants arriving in the States since 1965): “lower-middle class” and “upper-middle class”. This allows her to consider in her study the environment young people live in and how it could impact their language. Lower-middle class teens live in small house, close to their school and their neighborhoods were surrounded by a variety of different cultures while the upper-middle class teenagers live in bigger houses surrounded by wealthy White or Asian families. This difference of class had led the Desi teens to separate themselves into cliques: the popular Desi (upper class) and FOBs, which stands for Fresh Off the Boat, (lower class). FOB teens were closer to their mother tongue and religion and spent more time with other minority students than popular teens. Fob teens also use lunch and break time as an occasion to speak their heritage language with their fellows, while the popular Desi rarely spoke their mother tongue in school, as they considered it as not a part of everyday interaction. The purpose of her study was to point out that ethnicity and race are not something fixed in youth language, but are built with the political economy, environment, class and values. It shows also that some young people are still attached to their heritage and culture while some tend to detach themselves from their home’s culture by acculturating themselves.

Kerswill (2013) focused on the construction of youth language in London and more specifically on how language and identity are mainly linked with multiethnicity and multilingualism. His study also deals with the concepts of race, age, culture and class. He focuses his study by comparing the language of teenagers from two regions of London, Hackney, which belongs to the inner city, and Havering from the outer city. The teenagers were divided into two groups: Anglo and non-Anglo. He observes that the language of teenagers coming from inner-city has more words from foreign vocabularies than outer city. They seem to be more open to new innovations for language than Havering’s teenagers. This could be due to the importance of the number immigrant families in London’s inner city than outer city. He discovers that non-Anglo teens in Hackney and Havering highly reject a Cockney identity, which is a term used for native inhabitant of East London, although their language might be close to a traditional Cockney language. Thus, it highlights that the ethnicity has an important place for the construction of identity for young people and they do not want to be associated with a culture they do not belong.

Image free of copyright: https://search.creativecommons.org/

Lytra (2015) has invested in young Turkish-descent’s belief about standard and varieties of Turkish. She chose two groups of young Turkish to compare in her study: one community is based in London while the second one is from Athens. She has chosen these two communities due to their differences in term of migration histories, education or religious background.  Indeed, the Turkish-speaking community who lives in Athens is mainly from lower class than the community who belongs to London. She found out that in both communities, young people were surrounded by the two varieties: the vernacular is mainly used at their home and the standard through different types of medias. They value standard Turkish and its vernaculars, although they were taught that mastering the standard Turkish is linked with academic success. Furthermore, a majority of young Turkish in her study were showing loyalty towards the vernaculars spoken at home although they were taught in Turkish complementary schools that they should speak the standard due to its high position. This loyalty towards a variety might be explained with the link that it has with young people’s home and families while the standard is only used through medias.

Hambye and Gadet (2014) focus their research on the linguistic hybridity on youth language, also known as CUV an abbreviation that stands for contemporary urban vernacular, in France. Youth language in France is widely known for vernalization, an argot that consist of reversing the syllables of a word (louche for example becomes chelou) and multiethnolect, which is of the incorporation of foreign words, for example, Arabic words such as wAllah, starfoulah, or hmar. Also, the Arabic language is known to be the most influential language for French vernaculars. This is highlighted for example with the French youth expression sur la vie de ma mère, used as a pledge and is directly modelled from the Arabic language (wa hayat omi). Besides, some expressions are modeled from this language into French. In contemporary urban vernaculars of France, the authors observe many phenomena in youth language. Indeed, young people use a lot of slang words and omission of words. They also highlight that this manner of speaking is a way for young people to mark their identities, especially ethnic and cultural identity. Therefore, youth language should not be reduced to only a marker of identity as there are various factors that must also be taken in account. It could be for example, a manner for young people to contest the dominant culture, but it is also highly impacted by their environment and social class.

4.  Discussion / Conclusion

These research allow us to have a better understanding on how migration and the parents’ language have impacted youth language. Therefore, previous studies have shown that the globalisation and transnationalism play important roles for youth language as they allow young people to innovate in their manner of speaking and break standard rules concerning standard language. The home language highly influences young people’s language. They can, for example, code-switch between their mother language and the language of the country they live in, which means they can alternate between these languages. They can also incorporate some foreign vocabulary or model some expressions from their home language into the official language of the country they live in.

This incorporation of their home language made by young people can be seen as a marker of identity. Indeed, young people are usually confronted to the culture of the country they live in, and the fusion of foreign vocabulary mean their belonging to their parents’ language. Young people were also seen to show loyalty to the vernacular languages, although they show respect to both varieties, standard and vernacular. This loyalty toward the vernacular might be due to the fact that youth language is in general seen as a poor vernacular and suffers from stereotypes. Young people might have taken in account these negative attitudes towards their manner of speaking and thus present loyalty towards other vernaculars.  

Therefore, the ethnicity is not a major point to understand youth language as it is highly linked with other factors, such as the environment, gender or the social class. It is thus important in youth language’s studies, to not only consider only the parents’ language and ethnicity, but also take in account the environment in which young people live (is it, for example, mixed with other immigrant’s families or are there only a few immigrant families?), the social class (is the family from an upper or lower class?), or the gender, to have a better comprehension of how youth language is constructed. Each of these factors directly impact teenager and their manner of speaking.

However, the studies presented in this blog entry were only focusing on youth language in the Western World. The results might not be applicable to all of youth language and thus, does not allow to have a global idea on how youth language is built all over the world.

It would have been interesting, to push the studies of this blog entry further by having a direct contact with young people and ask them how and why they use, for example, slang words or code-switching. The comparison between these interviews and interactional data can lead to have a better understanding on youth language’s construction and a perception from young people.

Image free of copyright: https://search.creativecommons.org/

References

Bucholtz, M. and Skapoulli, E. 2009. Youth language at the intersection: from migration to globalization. International Pragmatics Association. 19:1.1-16  Available at: https://escholarship.org/content/qt1mv7m8w8/qt1mv7m8w8_noSplash_7438b77ae7e69d0e11ec81ebd4989622.pdf?t=nukr28. Accessed on: 27/11/2020.

Hambye, P. and Gadet, F. 2014. Contact and ethnicity in “youth language” description: in search of specificity. Digital acces to librairies. Robert Nicolai; “Questioning Language Contact: Limits of Contact, Contact at its Limits”- p. 183-216 (ISBN: 9789004279049)

Kerswill, P. 2013. Identity, ethnicity and place: the construction of youth language in London. White Rose Research Online. Available at: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/75329/. Accessed on: 26/11/2020

Lytra, V. 2015. Language and language ideologies among Turkish-speaking young people in Athens and London. Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century. Cambridge University Press, pp.183-204 (ISBN: 9781139061896)

Shankar, S. 2012. Style and Language Use among Youth of the New Immigration: Formations of Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Class in Everyday Practice. Identities Global Studies in Culture and Power. Pp. 646-671 Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/1070289X.2011.672867?needAccess=true. Accessed on: 28/11/2020

Svendsen, B.A.  2015. Language, youth and identity in the 21st century: content and continuations. Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century. Cambridge University Press, pp.3-23 (ISBN: 9781139061896)