Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division

Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:13 Page Number: 207 10 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social divisions Lian Malai Madsen and Bente Ailin Svendsen In recent decades there has been a great deal of interest in speech stylization in sociolinguistics (e.g. Coupland 2007; Rampton 1995, 2006, 2009), i.e. instances where speakers produce ‘specially marked and often exaggerated representations of languages, dialects and styles that lie outside their own habitual repertoire (at least as this is perceived within the situation at hand)’ (Rampton 2009: 149). Stylized speech events involve projections of recognizable social personas different from the speaker, and represent as such ‘strategic inauthentic’ speech, bringing into play ‘stereotyped personas and genre’ derived ‘from well-known identity repertoires’ (Coupland 2007: 154). The interest for stylizations and their interactional functions has increased concurrently with the augmented diversification (Appadurai 1990, Vertovec 2010) of today’s globalized societies, since stylized speech appears particularly well-tuned to the sociolinguistic complexities of contemporary urban settings (Blommaert and Rampton 2011; Jaspers 2010). In his analyses of stylized speech among British-born school children in multiethnic schools in London and in the South Midlands of England, Rampton (1995, 2006) unveils the indexical subtlety with which young people articulate their apprehensions of ‘us/them’-social relations, and of well-established and ongoing ‘high/low’ stratification processes (Rampton 2009; see also Madsen 2011). He demonstrates how stylized speech functions as a window to young people’s perceptions of social class, a subject rarely discussed amongst young inner Londoners – ‘race, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality were all much hotter topics’, as he puts it (Rampton 2006: 244; cf. Rampton 2009: 165). Although the young Londoners did not discuss social class to any degree, class hierarchy had a pervasive influence on their discursive consciousness or sociolinguistic ‘habitus’, exemplified through their routine phonological style shifting between standard and vernacular, and through their regular stylizations of Cockney versus ‘posh’ sounding voices (Rampton 2006: 239ff ). In other words, Rampton (2006, 2009) shows that there might be a discrepancy 207 Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:13 Page Number: 208 208 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen between overt accounts of social differentiations and the perceptions of social stratification revealed through stylized voices. In this chapter, we compare interactional data from young people in diverse urban neighbourhoods in Oslo (Norway) and Copenhagen (Denmark). We explore interactional stylization practices as a fruitful method by which to examine the ways in which young people perceive and relate to the established and ongoing social stratification in two diverse, albeit comparable research sites: Oslo, the capital of a country often rather mythologically described as a ‘classless’ society (e.g. Barnes 1954) and as a country with abundant officially recognized linguistic heterogeneity; and Denmark, a country wherein language standardization has been particularly powerful in relation to most other European countries (Pedersen 2009: 281). The development towards linguistic uniformity in Denmark is closely related to a conservative standard language ideology, firmly governing linguistic attitudes and policies, evident in public discourse and education (e.g. Gregersen 2011; Kristiansen and Jørgensen 2003). In contrast, Norway has had a long tradition of political acceptance for vernaculars, dating back to 1878 when the Parliament passed a bill stating that children ought to be educated in their own vernacular (i.e. Norwegian dialects, not other languages such as Sami and Kven). Furthermore, Norway experienced a de-standardization process and an increased use of dialects across various domains during the 1970s (Sandøy 2011). Hence, Norwegian language policy, media practices and education have to a great extent reflected regional linguistic diversity, and have led to a general sociolinguistic environment tolerant of linguistic differences (e.g. Kristiansen and Vikør 2006; Sandøy 2011). Although Danish and Norwegian are mutually intelligible languages (at least with some effort), the sociolinguistic development in Norway and Denmark thus differs. The sociopolitical development in the post-war era in Norway and Denmark, however, is similar in many respects. The development of the Scandinavian welfare model has resulted in fewer socioeconomic differences than in other Western European countries (Brochmann and Hagelund 2010). According to Brochmann and Hagelund (2010: 351), the generous allowance of rights and benefits characteristic of the Scandinavian welfare model has entailed relatively restrictive immigration policies. The so-called ‘immigrant populations’ in Denmark and Norway are of similar proportions (10.4% in Denmark versus 12.2% in Norway, including children born in Norway and Denmark respectively by ‘foreign-born’ parents: Statistics Denmark 2012; Statistics Norway 2012). Still, Denmark has had the most restrictive immigration policy within Scandinavia (Brochmann and Hagelund 2010), and Copenhagen Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:14 Page Number: 209 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 209 is slightly more demographically homogeneous with an immigrant population of 22.2% (Statistics Denmark 2012), compared to Oslo’s 28% (Statistics Norway 2012). Recent studies of language practices among adolescents in multiethnic neighbourhoods in Oslo and Copenhagen reveal metalinguistic accounts of how young people relate to and experience their contemporary sociolinguistic complexity (Aarsæther 2010; Madsen 2011; Svendsen and Røyneland 2008). In Copenhagen, adolescents seem to link their own way of speaking to a broader socioeconomic hierarchy contrasted with the standard variety that is perceived as academic, representing higher socioeconomic status (Madsen 2011, 2013a). In Oslo, adolescents can be seen to construct an opposition in their metalinguistic accounts in alignment with an old geographical border, the river Akerselva. Akerselva has traditionally divided the industrial eastern working-class area from the western upper-class area, resulting in a sociolinguistic divide between the so-called østkantmål (‘East End vernacular’) and the middle and upper class ‘posh’ vernacular vestkantmål (‘West End vernacular’), a linguistic compromise between written Danish (the former colonial language) and spoken Norwegian (e.g. Jahr 1988). Given that the immigrant population resides most often in the eastern parts of the city and in the suburban areas in the northeast and southeast of Oslo (Statistics Norway 2012), some of the adolescents in parts of these areas (regardless of parental background) can be observed to overtly position themselves against the Oslo West End (Aarsæther 2010; Svendsen and Røyneland 2008). In both cities we thus find intersections of ethnicity and status relations in adolescents’ metalinguistic accounts. In this chapter, we continue this exploration of adolescents’ perceptions of social and ethnic differentiation through their stylization practices, especially since we know from studies such as Jaspers (2011a) and Rampton (2006), as emphasized above, that more implicit linguistic indexicals expressed through stylization and other metapragmatic activities might alter the picture gathered from overt metalinguistic accounts. Indeed, as Jaspers (2011a) shows, traditional Antwerp dialect was explicitly associated with ‘old racist’ stereotypes, while in interactional stylizations the dialect was recruited to bring about relations of authority and social status (in combination with masculinity). Thus, stylizations may contribute to the potential breakdown of imagined linguistic borders and fixed relationships between signs, voices and typical speaker personas. Stylizations are nonetheless achieved and recognized specifically because they build on some level of shared understanding of linguistic signs’ (potential) indexical values based on the enregisterment of styles as particular sociohistorical constructs, as registers (Agha 2005, 2007; see below). Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:14 Page Number: 210 210 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen Our main focus in this chapter is not stylization of various speech styles per se, nor is it the actual linguistic forms used in adolescents’ stylization practices or more routine styleshifting (e.g. Rampton 2006: 252ff ). Our main interest is in the personas and identities invoked in adolescents’ stylized speech and the stereotypes they bring into play; how these projected personas reconcile, challenge or subvert stereotypical representations of language, its users and hegemonic language ideologies, and the ways the projected personas or identities might reveal knowledge of adolescents’ comprehension of the established and ongoing ethnic and social differentiation in Oslo and Copenhagen. The following questions serve to address our overarching research objectives. (i) How are different kinds of stylized voices employed for particular interactional purposes among adolescents in multiethnic neighbourhoods in Oslo and Copenhagen? (ii) How are dimensions of ethnic and social differentiation brought about in the adolescents’ stylization practices? (iii) Are there differences and similarities between the way youth in Oslo and Copenhagen bring about dimensions of ethnic and social differentiation through interactional stylization? (iv) If so, can the differences be explained by the larger scale sociocultural and sociolinguistic differences in Oslo and Copenhagen? Before delving into the comparison of data and stylization practices, we briefly review the employed theoretical framework on stylization, semiotic registers and social stratification. Stylization, semiotic registers and social stratification It is an inherent aspect of human social interaction that we relate linguistic behaviour to broader systems of semiotic resources of certain social indexicality (Agha 2007). Sets of linguistic resources are conceptualized as systems of signs that belong together and relate to certain places, social connotations, values and images of personas. Stereotypes of a register’s forms and values are dependent on the metapragmatic typifications of language and their users, such as in the use of labels such as ‘polite language’, ‘slang’, ‘working-class speech’, ‘medical language’; in standards of appropriate usage; in positive or negative accounts of typical speakers; or in descriptions of the social worth of the language (Agha 2007: 150). Key evidence for the existence of metapragmatic stereotypes lies in such overt and recurrent evaluations of linguistic expressions and language users, and registers in themselves are identified by appeal to reflexive evaluations of speech (Agha 2007: 170). Reflexive evaluations Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:14 Page Number: 211 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 211 of speech might also be implicit, unveiled for instance in stylized voices, particularly in parody and irony, in what Bakhtin (1981: 324), with whom the concept of stylization is originally associated, refers to as vari-directional double voicing. While some stylized voices can hardly be distinguishable from the speaker’s own voice (uni-directional double voicing, Bakhtin 1984: 199), others are more clearly separable from the speaker’s voice and carry different intentions from the original voice (vari-directional). Stylization is thus a dynamic concept in which we can view utterances as more or less stylized. Stylization is not, however, a mere artful performance act (e.g. Bauman 1986: 3) wherein the ways in which ‘communication is carried out, above and beyond its referential content’ are emphasized. Rampton (2009) elaborates on the approaches to stylization through Goffman’s (1959, 1981) interaction ritual, where Rampton views stylizations as ‘keys’ that help to stabilize the interactional order. He finds that stylizations often occur precisely at those moments when potential threats to this order are in the air, such as when a potential face-threatening act occurs. Studying performative, non-habitual, non-routine or ‘inauthentic’ language use thus allows us to (1) explore the situated manufacturing of norms and (2) to discover potential changes or de-naturalizations of hegemonic sociolinguistic norms in the communities of practice we study (Rampton 2009). According to Bradley (1996: 45), social class ‘is a label applied to a nexus of unequal lived relationships arising from the social organization of production, distribution, exchange and consumption’, and race and ethnicity are ‘social categories used to explain a highly complex set of territorial relationships’ (p. 19). Social class includes various aspects of occupation and employment hierarchies, income and wealth, lifestyle, and finally cultural practices (including linguistic) arising from these (pp. 45–6); whereas ethnicity involves the idea of territorial groups, nation states and processes of migration and conquests (pp. 19–20). Within sociolinguistics, social class is associated with the classical Labovian (e.g. Labov 1966) sociolinguistic approach to variation. In line with the so-called ‘cultural turn’ in social and political theory (see e.g. Halldén, le Grand and Hellgren 2008), class has not been seen as a relevant category to understand the mechanisms of linguistic variation within late modern sociolinguistics and the constructivist practice approach (see Chapter 1). This ‘cultural turn’ has led to a focus on recognizing unprivileged groups for their ‘cultural’ particularity. A horizontal view has therefore been applied to social relations (one culture next to the other) and the hierarchical organization and the unequal distribution of resources has been ignored to some extent Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:15 Page Number: 212 212 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen (e.g. Hobson 2003). Some sociologists have even proclaimed the death of class (Bauman 1992). By following sociological theorists who integrate ethnicity within the framework of social stratification (Halldén, le Grand and Hellgren 2008), we highlight that class and ethnicity are interrelated categories in contemporary societies. Both represent categories of advantage or disadvantage in life, and we thus challenge the late modern practice approach to language variation wherein class has perhaps been thrown out with the bath water. Against this succinctly sketched theoretical framework, we present the two comparative studies. Data, participants and methods The stylizations discussed in this chapter are from the Danish Amagerproject in Copenhagen (see Ag 2010; Madsen, Jørgensen and Møller 2010; Stæhr 2010) and the Norwegian UPUS- project in Oslo (Utviklingsprosesser i urbane språkmiljø ‘Developmental Processes in Urban Linguistic Settings’) (see Aarsæther 2010; Opsahl and Nistov 2010; Svendsen 2010; Svendsen and Røyneland 2008). Both projects have collected a vast amount of ethnographic and linguistic data. The Danish data were collected in and around an urban school in the area of Amager in Copenhagen. This neighbourhood is a former traditional working-class area, but since the 1990s the population has gradually become increasingly diverse economically, educationally and with regard to linguistic and ethnic background. A new principal at the school has recently succeeded in attracting the better educated, majority Danish families who previously enrolled their children in less heterogeneous private schools. This means that the pupil population has changed from 62% so-called ‘bilingual students’ in 2007 to 30% in 2011 (corresponding to the general average for the schools in the area). In the two seventh-to-ninth grade classes we have followed since 2009, 75% and 82% of the students have an ethnic minority background. The Amagerproject includes a range of data types collected in school settings as well as during leisure activities and family life: recorded conversations, self-recordings, group recordings, diaries from participant observation, ethnographic interviews, written texts and IT-based communication. The data taken into consideration in the analysis of stylizations presented here include (a) recordings of ethnographic interviews conducted by one of the researchers with groups of participants and individual participants, (b) recordings with a wireless microphone (which the participants were asked to wear) during classes, breaks and in the youth clubs, as well as (c) self-recordings by the participants (which they could control Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:15 Page Number: 213 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 213 themselves). The data from the Amager-project included in this chapter comprise 31 hours of recordings. The Norwegian data were collected between 2006 and 2008 in the inner city district of Gamle Oslo where the immigrant population constitutes 36% of the total population, and in the suburban city district of Søndre Nordstrand where the immigrant population is 48% (1 January 2011, Statistics Norway 2012). To elicit data, a triangulation of methods was used: a questionnaire to map reported language choice and competence, style and interests, phonological perception and production tasks, participant observations and video-taped ethnographic interviews and dyadic peer conversations that took place at youth clubs in the adolescents’ neighbourhoods. The interviews were conducted with one of the researchers; there were no adults present during the peer conversations. The data are available through an Internet-based interface, where audio and video files are linked with transcripts of the participants’ interviews and peer conversations (Text Laboratory). The data drawn on in this chapter are obtained through qualitative analyses of a total of 43 interviews and 23 peer conversations. The adolescents are between 13 and 19 years of age – 27 boys and 16 girls – and they were all born and raised in Norway. A majority of them have either one (7) or both (26) parents born in a country other than Norway, whereas 15 have two Norwegian-born parents. The Norwegian data consist of 17.5 hours of recorded speech, comprising 6.5 hours recorded peer conversations, and 11 hours of recorded interviews. A linguistic production is considered stylized when it in one way or another stands out when compared to a speaker’s general linguistic behaviour as it is known to us as linguistic ethnographers or interlocutors in a given interaction. Stylizations are perceived in relation to assumed expectations of regular speaker behaviour, regular range of features, regular voices and regular users of voices (at least as this is perceived within the situation). Yet, it is worth noting that stylization as such is not an exceptional practice in interactions among (perhaps in particular, contemporary young) speakers. Consequently, stylizations sometimes do not result in any observable reactions at all among other participants, although the analyst might notice a linguistic production as exaggerated, marked and stylized (as also Rampton 2006: 225 notes). Most often, though, a stylization is reacted to in one way or another in our data. Stylizations are typically reacted to with laughter, or followed up by similar stylizations by co-participants (cf. Coupland 2007). Whether or not we consider a stretch of talk to be stylized is informed by our familiarity with the participants in our studies. In addition, our experience as speakers with a thorough knowledge of available linguistic resources and their social connotations Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:15 Page Number: 214 214 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen in the contexts of Oslo and Copenhagen further helps determine whether or not an utterance can be qualified as stylized. Voices brought about in Copenhagen and Oslo The analysis of stylizations in the Copenhagen data is based on the 31 hours of recordings, 7 hours of which are from interview settings and the rest recorded during everyday activities in school and leisure contexts. An overview of the stylization data shows that during these recordings, the participants produce utterances that contain stylized speech with a frequency that corresponds to one stylized utterance every 7–8 minutes (but they are of course not evenly distributed). There are no striking differences in the frequency of stylizations between different communicative contexts. Stylizations occur in interviews, during classes as well as during breaks and leisure activities, and they are directed at researchers and teachers as well as peers. In the Oslo data, however, there is a salient difference in the frequency of stylizations in the two communicative settings. In the interviews, stylized speech events occur with a frequency corresponding to one every 6–7 minutes, whereas the frequency of stylizations in the peer conversations corresponds to one every 2–3 minutes. Despite good intentions of creating a dialogue, the Norwegian ethnographic interviews are characterized by a question– answer structure, and as such represent a more formal setting than the peer conversations where there were no adults present and the adolescents were allowed to talk about whatever they liked (and to consume soft drinks and sweets, undoubtedly triggering the adolescents’ blood sugar and conversational energy). Hence, the difference in frequency of stylizations in the two contexts in the Oslo data fits the hypothesis that stylizations are more likely to occur in informal settings (Rampton 2006). This is less so in the Danish study, where the approach has been different, and long-term ethnography and participant observations among the adolescents are likely to have facilitated a more informal relationship between the researchers and the researched in general (see Ag 2010; Stæhr 2010). In both data sets we find that stylizations do not, as mentioned above, occur evenly spread, but appear to come in clusters where one stylization often invites others. Interactionally, the stylizations occur in a myriad of conversational contexts: when adolescents launch a new topic, when they play with words, sing or perform for each other (see Extracts (1)–(3) below), when they illustrate a point made (Extract (4)), when they playfully sanction each other (see Extract (1)), when they demonstrate their disapproval (see Extract (2)) or when the interactional order is disturbed (see Extract (3)). Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:17 Page Number: 215 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 215 Types of stylizations in the Copenhagen data The most common type of stylization in the Copenhagen data is specific parodies of peers or teachers, present or known to all the participants in a given encounter. Another frequent type of stylization involves linguistic features associated with ethno-linguistic stereotypes. Approximately one fifth of the stylizations bring about associations of ethnicity or nationality (admittedly very different ones). The adolescents employ exaggerations of features associated with Danish spoken with a Pakistani accent, English spoken with a Pakistani accent, mock Urdu, Danish spoken with Turkish pronunciation features, American-accented English and English spoken by Africans. In addition, they play with linguistic fragments associated with Icelandic, Filipino, Chinese, Russian, Arabic, French, German and Spanish, they stylize cross-ethnic ‘immigrant/learner’ Danish and English and occasionally perform exaggerated versions of what might be called the ‘contemporary Copenhagen vernacular’ (cf. Chapter 2). Hence, the adolescents employ a range of distinct ethno-linguistic stereotypes in their stylization practices, as exemplified in Extract (1). Stylized voices are in bold. (1) Stylized ‘Arabic English’ in Copenhagen During a school break in Amager, Copenhagen, Kurima and Shahid have been discussing their results of a recent reading test. Shahid achieved a mid-level mark, but claims that next time he will achieve top marks. Bashaar, who is present in the school yard, joins the conversation. 1 Sha: åh jeg er bedre end jer 2 alle sammen mand 3 Kur: [na]ha:j 4 Bas: [you](.) my friend 5 you’ve got a very 6 beautiful future in 7 front of you you’re 8 gonna travel to 9 to Lon"don (.) 10 and stu"dy 11 Sha: hey lad nu være 12 (hvorfor skulle jeg) 13 lad nu være med at 14 gøre det herovre 1 Sha: Oh I’m better than 2 3 Kur: 4 Bas: 5 6 all of you man [no:] [you](.) my friend you’ve got a very beautiful future in 7 front of you you’re 8 gonna travel to 9 to Lon"don (.) 10 and stu"dy 11 Sha: hey don’t 12 (why should I) 13 just stop doing 14 that over here Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:17 Page Number: 216 216 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen 15 (gu:)du skal BARE IK 16 gøre det herovre 17 KORAN jeg skal ikke 18 røre det der vand 19 Bas: you’re gonna study in 20 Bol"ton I think it’s 21 gonna be a very good eh 22 eh lesson for "you 23 because you are are a 24 man with a heart of gold 25 Sha: thank you thank you 26 Bas: and and and and you 27 have a good [brain] ((girls approach Bashaar and interrupt)) 15 (gu:)you shall JUST NOT 16 do it over here 17 CORAN I won’t touch 18 that kind of water 19 Bas: you’re gonna study in 20 Bol"ton I think it’s 21 gonna be a very good eh 22 eh lesson for "you 23 because you are are a 24 man with a heart of gold 25 Sha: thank you thank you 26 Bas: and and and and you 27 have a good brain] ((girls approach Bashaar and interrupt)) After Kurima has protested against Shahid’s claim of being better than everyone, Bashaar begins a performance in English marked by a range of pronunciation features. Apart from the code switch, the marked features include unrounded and fronted /u/ in London and study, rolled /r/ in front and brain, monophthong instead of diphthong in brain, aspirated final /d/ in friend and r-sound instead of /t/ in beautiful, as well as stress and pitch rise on the final syllables in certain words (London and Bolton). The pronunciation features leave the impression of an adult English learner (or non-Anglo). In addition, the content, intonation and pauses leave the impression of a performance of a public speech. After this sequence, some girls interrupt Bashaar and address Shahid. Bashaar reacts with the utterance: let me finish let me finish my speech with my boy with my son and the girls after this react with a stop that Lebanese. Thus, as a reaction to a friend’s academic boasting, Bashaar performs a voice of a supportive fatherly persona praising the heart and the mind of his son and hoping for a bright future. In contrast to this evocation of high academic aspirations, the voice of this figure is performed with features associated with adultlearner English. This combination indexes a naivety on the part of the father figure, highlighting the unrealistically high ambitions in relation to the relatively poor academic value of the linguistic resources demonstrated here. Bashaar’s performance functions locally as a playful sanctioning of a friend’s boasting and plays on a stereotype of (unrealistic) parental Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:17 Page Number: 217 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 217 expectations for a successful future. The accented English performed by Bashaar here resembles what Jaspers (2011b) identifies as the practice of ‘talking illegal’ among adolescents in Antwerp. Jaspers describes how the practice of stylizing accented or ‘incorrect learner speech’ locally serves the purpose of critically engaging with and at the same time co-constructing dominant structures of societal and institutional inequalities. Thus, stereotypic ethnically marked voices are used to highlight a general marginal social positioning associated with linguistic incompetence, rather than specific ethnic differences. This kind of employment of recognizable ethnically coloured pronunciation or non-standard learner styles is clearly at play in Extract (1) (and many of the other examples of stylized accented speech associated with adult or newcomer learners in the Copenhagen data). The non-academic and incompetent associations stereotypically related to adult and newcomer-accented speech are here exploited playfully to put a friend in his place after he has explicitly claimed a perhaps too-ambitious academic and linguistic status. The participants in the Copenhagen data rarely stylize dialectal speech. In the 31 hours of data, only three cases can be considered a rough use of regional Jutlandic-coloured prosody. In addition, there are no stylizations that can be characterized as traditional low- or high-Copenhagen speech (though the examples discussed in Extract (2) below include a few vowel pronunciations traditionally involving ‘high’ connotations). This seems to suggest that social class is not a relevant issue for the adolescents. However, metalinguistic reports did, as stated above, point to the relevance of social differentiation in their understanding of stylistic difference. Even if adolescents do not bring about societal hierarchical relations through the traditional linguistic means of distinction, the third most common type of stylizations, namely that which could be called ‘stylized integrated’, clearly shows that social hierarchies and stratification processes were evoked in other ways (Madsen 2013b; see below). During interviews in our study in Copenhagen, the participants introduced labels for two ways of speaking that differ from what they refer to as ‘normal’. One of these was integreret (‘integrated’). The participants characterize ‘integrated’ by features of distinct pronunciation, abstract and academic vocabulary, high pitch, calm attitude and ritual politeness phrases. This way of speaking is associated with upscale culture, sophistication, authority, emotional control and aversion to rudeness, academic skills, politeness and respect. Thus, in the values and privileges it evokes, ‘integrated’ seems to be undergoing enregisterment as a conservative standard code (see detailed analysis in Madsen 2011, 2013a). Extract (2) is from a recording in Copenhagen by Bashaar (Bas) during a Danish lesson. During the recording period, Bashaar’s class Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:18 Page Number: 218 218 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen participated in a rap workshop, which required the class to stay longer than usual on that day (the workshop involved a performance and recording of their own rap song). Just prior to this sequence, the teacher, Susanne (Sus) complained about the students not passing on information about school activities at home and not returning acceptance forms from their parents (in this case a signed form allowing their child to be recorded during the rap workshop). Bashaar has been mentioned as one of those who still had not returned the form, and the teacher claimed that students who had not handed in the form would not be allowed to participate in the recording. To this warning Bashaar replied jo selvfølgelig (‘yes of course’). Hence, aspects of criticism from the teacher as well as the teacher’s power to sanction unsatisfactory behaviour (by cancelling parties and not allowing pupils to participate in certain activities) is at play in this stretch of conversation. At the same time, Bashaar’s behaviour in the class (in general) as an entertainer and provocateur plays a significant part. In the beginning of this sequence, the teacher explains that they will get to leave earlier another day because they are asked to stay longer on the day of the recordings. The stylized utterances in focus are marked bold. (2) Stylized ‘integrated’ in Copenhagen Wireless recording by Bashaar during Danish lesson. Speakers: Susanne (Sus, teacher), Bashaar (Bas), Jamil (Jam) as well as an unidentified boy (Boy) and girl (Girl) from the class. 1 Sus: 2 3 4 5 6 Bas: 7 Sus: 8 9 og øh vi kan jo ikke forlange at I skal 1 Sus: blive i tre timer og så ikke få noget goodwill [på den måde at I får] [ne:j selvfølgelig ikke] en anden dag tidligere fri så I får tidligt fri om [fredagen i næste uge] 3 2 4 5 and eh well we can’t demand that you stay for three hours and not get any goodwill [in a way that you] 6 Bas: [no: of course not] 7 Sus: another day get to leave earlier so you get to [leave early next Friday] 8 9 Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:19 Page Number: 219 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 10 Bas: [ej hvor flot mand] ((clap and cheering)) 11 Boy: tre timer 12 Girl: der er stadig IT ikke 13 Sus: [ja og xxx xxx Ole han 14 nok dropper der] [det er fandeme flot 16 altså Susanne og Inger 17 I kan sutte min (xxx)] 18 Jam: e:h 19 Sus: [det bliver han så lige 20 nødt til] 21 Boy: [(så er der to timer)] 22 Girl: [han dropper også denne 23 her uge så] er der to 24 af dem 25 Sus: har han også droppet 26 denne her uge ((several ‘yes’)) 15 Bas: 219 [oh how splendid man] ((clap and cheering)) 11 Boy: three hours 12 Girl: there’s still IT right 13 Sus: yes and xxx xxx Ole he 14 [probably skip that] 15 Bas: [that’s damned nice 16 really Susanne and Inger 17 you can suck my (xxx)] 18 Jam: e:h 19 Sus: [well he’ll just 10 Bas: 20 21 Boy: have to] [then it’s two lessons)] 22 Girl: [he skips this week as 23 well so] then its’ two 24 of them 25 Sus: has he skipped this 26 week too ((several ‘yes’)) Bashaar’s contributions in lines 6, 10 and 15–17 are interesting as doublevoiced stylizations in more than one sense. Here, they combine linguistic and communicative resources that point in the direction of different speaker persona, and partly because of this they leave the impression of a vari-directional (Bakthin 1981) voicing of enthusiasm (lines 6 and 10) as well as complaint (lines 15–17). The utterances function as comments on the information and explanations given by the teacher, but rather than being direct contributions to the official classroom discourse, they are directed at the classmates in the immediate surrounding, spoken with a subdued voice, overlapping with the teacher’s speech. On the surface, the utterances in lines 6 and 10 are expressions of agreement and approval. In line 6, however, the initial prolongation and a relatively more fronted and unrounded pronunciation of the vowel in nej (‘no’) (compared to Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:19 Page Number: 220 220 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen Bashaar’s more frequent pronunciation of ‘no’) signals inauthenticity. This vowel pronunciation is stereotypically associated with conservative standard speech. Here, it is combined with the expression of course which Bashaar has used in a similar utterance four minutes earlier, and he in fact repeats it twice within one minute (after this sequence). This recurrent expression of agreement contributes to the impression of exaggerated obedience. Thus, the utterance in line 6 can be considered a varidirectional stylization of an obedient and enthusiastic student voice indexed by relatively subtle linguistic features of a conservative standard pronunciation combined with a polite expression of agreement. The utterance in line 10 is a partially similar stylization. It expresses enthusiastic approval and achieves its marked character predominantly through the choice of vocabulary: ej hvor flot (‘oh how splendid’). Yet, this expression of approval with rather conservative and upscale cultural connotations is combined with a slang expression mand (‘man’) frequently used in adolescents’ regular casual speech. In this way, the utterance is not only double-voiced in the sense that the speaker is using the voice of another; on a linguistic level, it is also a combination of two voices. The combination further contributes to the inauthentic impression: this is neither an authentic conservative voice nor an authentic contemporary youth voice. The same combination recurs in the last utterance (lines 15–17). Here, the features of the swearing fandeme (‘damned’) and the I kan sutte min xxx (‘you can suck my xxx’), whatever it is he suggests they can suck (unclear from the recording), signals contemporary casual youth speech. Yet, the vowel in flot (‘splendid’) is pronounced with a slightly fronted and unrounded vowel, connoting conservative standard speech. Through this combination of linguistic and pragmatic features, Bashaar therefore manages to express the opposite of agreement and approval in reaction to a teacher’s criticism and sanctioning of the entertainment of the classmates. In doing so, he inauthentically takes on an ‘integrated’ voice in a context where institutional inequalities are spotlighted. We find a range of similar stylizations where norm transgressions and relations of power involving adult authorities of some kind are at play. Here the Copenhagen adolescents perform speech characterized by a combination of marked conservative pronunciations with exaggerated expressions of agreement, enthusiasm or politeness, and vocabulary indexing sophistication/academic reflection in communicative contexts. These observations, in fact, support the insights we have gained from our interview and essay data, and show that stylistic features of the speech they refer to as ‘integrated’ and which is described as being opposed to the contemporary urban vernacular are used interactionally to bring about relations of academic values, as well as relations of inequality and authority (Madsen 2013a). Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:19 Page Number: 221 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 221 Types of stylization in the Oslo data The Oslo data show a difference between the two communicative settings regarding the number of types of projected personas. In the peer conversations, adolescents project a wide range of different personas compared to the more limited gallery in the ethnographic interviews. In general, the ethnographic interviews entail stylizations in which the projected personas are more or less provoked by the topics addressed by the researcher in question. Given that the researchers’ main focus was on linguistic practices in multilingual neighbourhoods in Oslo, the vast majority of the stylized utterances in the interviews evoke personas that index stereotypical perceptions of ways of speaking within these neighbourhoods, such as kebabnorsk (‘Kebab-Norwegian’), jallanorsk (‘Jalla-Norwegian’), gangsternorsk (‘Gangster-Norwegian’), gatespråk (‘street language’) or Holmliaspråk (‘Holmlia-language’) (cf. Aarsæther 2010; Ims 2013; Svendsen 2014). In the peer conversations, however, the most common type of stylization involves projections of personas that invoke stereotypes associated with ethnicity, such as ‘immigrant’, ‘Norwegian’, ‘Pakistani’, ‘Arab’ and ‘American’, followed by the second-most frequent type, namely stylizations where they project images of a news reporter, journalist, radio host(ess) or perhaps a researcher in front of the camera (note that the conversations were videotaped). The ethnolinguistic features they employ are rather stereotypical: exaggerations of Norwegian spoken with stereotypical language-learner features to project an ‘immigrant’ persona, and exaggerations of words stereotypically associated with ways of speaking among young people in multilingual neighbourhoods. They also demonstrate their knowledge, as in the Danish data, of different ‘Englishes’: they stylize what they label ‘Pidgin English’, ‘Broken English’ and contrast it with what they label engelsk (‘English’) by employing RP pronunciation, and they reveal their knowledge of English spoken in Africa and in the USA. Moreover, they employ nonsense words with an Urdu/Hindi accent to stylize ‘very Pakistani’, as they put it, as demonstrated in Extract (3). Stylized voices are in bold. (3) ‘Stylized Urdu/Hindi’ and (emically) so-called ‘Kebab-Norwegian’ in Oslo: ‘Colour line’ A video-taped conversation between two 15-year-old girls, Kine (Kin) and Linn (Lin). Each has two Norwegian-born parents, and has grown up and lives in the east of the city. Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:21 Page Number: 222 222 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen 1 Kin: hvor? 2 Lin: oppover mot Colour line 3 Kin: Ammerud? 4 Lin: Colour line den banen! ((tilsynelatende irritert)) 5 Kin: ja men lissom hvor (.) 6 på Colour line 7 Lin: vet ikke jeg vel! ((tilsynelatende sint)) 1 Kin: where? 2 Lin: up towards Colour Line 3 Kin: Ammerud? 4 Lin: Colour Line that subway! ((seemingly annoyed)) 5 Kin: yes but like where (.) 6 on Colour Line 7 Lin: I really don’t know! ((seemingly angry)) 8 Kin: Colour Line (.) 8 Kin: Colour line (.) ((Urdu/Hindi ((urdu/hindi accent, with aksent, med 9 retroflekse flapper)) 9 retroflex flaps)) hhh men hhh but 10 også [Furuset da] 10 also [Furuset then] 11 Lin: [Colour line] 11 Lin: [Colour Line] 12 Kin: Furuset det er sjpa 12 Kin: Furuset that is sjpa1 13 Lin: ok men pakkiser i 13 Lin: OK but Pakkis in Oslo Oslo 14 hva gjør 14 what makes 15 pakkiser så 15 Pakkis so spesielt special (.) 16 (.) jo det skal jeg 16 yes that I will si tell 17 deg (.) de jævla17 you (.) the fuckin18 Kin: deilig 18 Kin: delicious 19 Lin: rumpene dems uh uff 19 Lin: their asses uh uff 20 Kin: rumpene (.) hhh 20 Kin: the asses (.) hhh the 21 nesene hhh hhh 21 noses hhh hhh 22 Lin: nesene (.) binni 22 Lin: noses (.) binni binni binni 23 (.) eh (.) jeh (.) eh 23 (.) eh (.) jeh ((tar seg til nesen)) (.) eh ((touches her nose)) 1 Sjpa is originally Berber and denotes positive evaluations such as ‘good’, ‘cool’, ‘pretty’ (Østby 2005). Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:21 Page Number: 223 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 223 24 Kin: hhh men ærlig det er 24 Kin: hhh but honestly it’s 25 (.) pakkiser de har 25 (.) Pakkis they have 26 brunt hår de har 26 brown hair they have 27 brune øyne de har 27 brown eyes they have 28 brun kropp (.) 28 brown body (.) uff (.) uff (.) 29 ferdig 29 done 30 Lin: uff [hhh (.) ferdig] 30 Lin: uff [hhh (.) done] 31 Kin: [hhh] 31 Kin: [hhh] 32 Lin: å lø diss a:s åh bah’ 32 Lin: oh lø dis a:s oh bah’ 33 xxx sjpa a:s hhh hhh 33 xxx sjpa a:s2 hhh hhh (.) 34 Kin: hhh [ja] 34 Kin: hhh [yes] 35 Lin: [når] jeg blir stor 35 Lin: [when] I grow up then så 36 skal jeg ha den 36 I’m gonna have the most 38 sjpa car in all of 37 sjpaeste bilen i hele 38 Furuset Furuset 39 Kin: (2.0) hæ? (.) hhh hhh 39 Kin: (2.0) hæ? (.) hhh hhh The stylized utterances in lines 8 (Colour line), 22 (binni binni) and 32–3 (oh lø dis a:s oh bah’ xxx sjpa a:s) may be described as full performances, where the manner in which communication is carried out is more important than the referential content (cf. Bauman 1986; Coupland 2007). The nonsense words binni binni index, as Kine states in a retrospective interview with her, a ‘very Pakistani’ identity. Lines 1–7 might be seen as a sequence where there is a misunderstanding of the use of and reference to Colour line, which is a Norwegian cruise line. In a rather creative (and perhaps pejorative) manner, Linn uses Colour line as a metaphor for subway number five, located in a culturally and ethnically diverse area. Apparently, Kine does not immediately understand Linn’s intention, and in lines 3 and 5 she asks 2 Å lø is an exclamatory and denotes several meanings such as negative surprise (Østby 2005). Dis may be an abbreviation for ‘disrespect’ and bah is most likely an abbreviation for bahmen originally from Kurdish and denotes ‘friend’; [a:s] is an contraction of altså (‘also’), common among adolescents in Oslo. Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:21 Page Number: 224 224 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen clarification questions. Kine’s two clarification questions are obviously one too many for Linn, and in line 4 she spells out the answer, but their misunderstanding is still not sorted out. Kine tries to specify her question even further (in line 5), but in line 7, Linn ‘spits’ out in a seemingly angry tone: I really don’t know! Her outburst might be interpreted as a remedial interchange (Goffman 1959, 1981), geared at keeping the interaction order, where she distances herself from the topic and a possible outright conflict by stating that she does not know. The interactional order is definitely at stake, and Kine stylizes Colour line as another remedial interchange in her following turn (Goffman 1959, 1981). Through her stylization, Kine invokes a ‘prototypical immigrant’ by employing an exaggerated Urdu/Hindi accent (with flaps) – invoking stereotypes that index first-generation immigrants – and thereby demonstrates that she did not misunderstand Linn; she knew what Colour line referred to all along (something like ‘the subway passing through areas where people with ‘foreign’ accents live’). In the same turn, she broaches a new topic, another heterogeneous place along ‘Colour line’, viz. Furuset. This may be interpreted as another remedial rehearsal, and a successful one, since Linn demonstrates her ‘acceptance’ by repeating Colour line in an even slightly more exaggerated manner, and by elaborating Kine’s new conversational topic of Furuset: Furuset that is sjpa, in line 12. They are now back on track. They have both saved face, and stabilized the interactional order. The girls’ use of Colour line and the pejorative term pakkiser (‘Pakis’) in lines 13 and 25 bring in to play stereotyped ideological values associated with a racist or exclusionary discourse. The intention may involve vari-directional double-voicing wherein the girls are parodying young male Pakistanis by portraying them (in the suburb Furuset) as youngsters with no interests other than posh cars (lines 35–8, when I grow up I’m gonna have the most sjpa car in all of Furuset). The varidirectional double-voicing is, however, short-lived or quickly corrected, through their swift move to express their attraction to Pakistani boys, as in lines 13–15, see the but and what makes Pakistanis so special, as if ‘special’ now corrects the stereotype they have just invoked. These two girls claim to hang out with boys with a Pakistani parental background and they are self-proclaimed speakers of so-called ‘KebabNorwegian’. Some youngsters with Norwegian-Pakistani background express that they themselves use the pejorative term pakkiser (‘Pakis’), but that its use is acceptable only by those who have the ‘right’ to use it (cf. Rampton 2009). It is not clear whether or not Kine and Linn have Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:22 Page Number: 225 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 225 the ‘right’ to use the term in general, but in the situation at hand it does somehow seem that they do, having ‘first-hand knowledge’ of the topic so to speak, describing the boys as rather sexy and desirable. Their male preferences are, moreover, the dark type: if they are to be Norwegians they must have brown eyes and brown hair . . . or else they must be foreigners (elsewhere in the same conversation, authors’ translation). Through their ‘first-hand knowledge’ and their alleged ‘right’ to use the pejorative term pakkiser (‘Pakis’), their stylized sequences may be seen as ways to mark attraction or accommodation and as instances of mocking at the same time. Hence, they both play with stereotyped ideological values associated with a racist or exclusionary discourse, and demonstrate their alignment with or attraction to young, male ‘foreigners’. In addition to the many stylized voices of ethnicity, the Oslo data contain many stylizations where adolescents employ exaggerated voices that invoke stereotypes that implicitly connect to the traditional socioeconomic division between East and West Oslo. These stylizations are performed through what is traditionally associated with the ‘High’ prestigious vernacular, vestkantmål (‘West End vernacular’), especially through a phonological movement, though not so much in grammar. There are very few exaggerated voices of the traditional østkantmål (‘East End vernacular’) (only to characterize the ways some speak on the east side of Oslo). Through their stylized ‘vestkantmål’ they invoke a diverse bouquet of personas, from the ‘racist’ or ‘excluding’ adult who tells them to keep away from their son or to go back to where they came from (see also Svendsen and Røyneland 2008), through the role of a news reporter or journalist, to the conservative ‘posh’ (adult?) who uses ‘sophisticated’ words (It is really sjpa we have football brother . . . impressing! (Vetle and Tariq, 13 years old); I’m not very good with such sophisticated words (Anders, 20 years old), authors’ translations, stylizations in bold). Only on few occasions, however, do they use stylized ‘vestkantmål’ in contexts where they explicitly address the traditional social division between East and West Oslo, as they do in Extract (4). Stylized voices are in bold. (4) Stylized‘Albanian’ and ‘vestkantmål’ (‘West End vernacular’) in Oslo: ‘School bread’ A videotaped conversation between two 14 and 15-year-old boys, Ummar and Jonny, at their youth club in Gamle Oslo. Jonny has Norwegian-born parents, whereas Ummar’s parents are born in Pakistan. Both have grown up and live in the east side of Oslo. Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:23 Page Number: 226 226 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen 1 Jon: jo (.) og så atte (.) 2 vestkanten har mere 3 fordommer mot øst 4 enn øst har mot vest 5 8 Umm: så de ligger litt der altså (.) der er kode er liksom (.) hvis du skjønner meg (.) de 9 er liksom helt 6 7 like ((’Albanian’ accent) 11 Jon: men de er litt mer eh 10 1 Jon: yes (.) and then (.) 2 the West End has more 3 predjudice against East 4 than East has against West 5 Umm: so they are placed a bit 6 there (.) there are ko7 they are like (.) if you 8 get what I mean (.) they 9 are like completely the 10 same ((‘Albanian’ accent)) 11 Jon: but the are a bit more eh 12 (.) they are not that 13 healthy either 14 Umm: no (.) you eat more 12 (.) de er ikke så 13 sunne heller da 14 Umm: nei (.) du spiser mer 15 kebab enn det jeg 15 kebab than I do gjør 16 Jon: ja og så spiser de 16 Jon: yes and then they (.) eat (.) 17 sko"lebrø"d (.) til 17 ‘schoo"l brea"d’ (.) for 18 lunsj (1.0) og (.) 18 lunch (1.0) and (.) 19 Litago og (.) mens 19 ‘Litago’ and (.) vi while we 20 drikker da (.) 20 drink (.) juice juice ((stylized ’Vestkantmål’)) ((stylized ‘West End vernacular’)) 21 Umm: vi drikker 21 Umm: we drink juice (.) juice (.) 22 Co[la] 22 Co[la] 23 Jon: [Co]la 23 Jon: [Co]la 24 hhh hhh (.) spiser 24 hhh hhh (.) eat 25 kebab 25 kebab 26 Umm: hhh hhh 26 Umm: hhh hhh 27 Jon: du vet sånn kebab 27 Jon: you know like kebab 28 Umm: sånn 28 Umm: like Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:23 Page Number: 227 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 227 29 Jon: sånn sunn kebab vet 29 Jon: like healthy kebab you 30 du 30 know 31 Umm: sånn sunn [kebab] 31 Umm: like healthy [kebab] 32 Jon: [sånn] kebab 32 Jon: [like] kebab 33 (.) sånn kebab (.) 33 (.) like kebab (.) 34 Umm: med litt sånn 34 Umm: with little like eh derre eh 35 ekstra kjøtt 35 extra meat and dr- eh og dr- e 36 Jon: kebab light vet du 36 Jon: kebab light you know 37 Umm: jaa 37 Umm: yeah 38 Jon: hhh hhh 38 Jon: hhh hhh In lines 7 and 8, Ummar adopts what might be perceived as an Albanian accent (if you get what I mean (.) they are like completely the same), and evokes an image of an (adult?) newcomer, perhaps alluding to an alleged linguistic ‘incompetency’. In lines 1–4, Jonny states that the West Enders are prejudiced against the East Enders, a statement similar to many overt metalinguistic accounts in the data as a whole (see Aarsæther 2010). In lines 5–10 it is possible that Ummar is expressing that prejudice (‘they [the East Enders] are completely the same, and they all speak with a ‘foreign’ accent’). Ummar is thereby evoking and appropriating the (West End) imagery that is apparently produced about them. This might be the reason why Ummar sees Jonny’s subsequent contribution (they are not that healthy either in lines 12–13) as a retort rather than an elaboration, and ‘attacks’ Jonny (you eat more kebab than I do), implying that Jonny is not allowed to accuse him of being unhealthy, a retort that seems to suggest that the East Enders are not that ‘innocent’ either. Jonny does not take up Ummar’s response, but goes on to exemplify the ‘unhealthy West Enders’ eating ‘school bread’ (a kind of pastry) for lunch, with an exaggerated stylized voice of vestkantmål (with fronted /u:/ and /ø:/, and an apical /l/ which could have been a retroflex flap in østkantmål, see Svendsen 2012 for the use of apical /l/ in Oslo which is also common in the more demotized Oslo contemporary ‘standard’). Moreover, the young West Enders are portrayed as drinking the (childish or uncool?) yoghurt drink Litago. In contrast, the two boys portray themselves or the youngsters in the East End as rather ‘healthy’, starting out by them drinking juice in line 20, and thereafter ‘unveiling’ in a self-mocking humouristic and ironic way their ‘true’ unhealthy habits, drinking Coca-Cola and eating kebab – kebab light that is – demonstrating that they in a self-mocking Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:24 Page Number: 228 228 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen way have the sociocultural ‘correct’ knowledge of healthy food. In another stretch of the same conversation, albeit later on, Jonny puts on a voice of a West Ender (without vestkantmål features), and says that the similarities between the West End and the East End are that they both drive Mercedes, but the difference is that he himself (self-positioned as a West Ender) cannot understand how Ummar (positioned as an East Ender) can afford it. Ummar replies rather ironically: stealing you know (.) the kebab-shop goes really well (authors’ translation), bringing into play stereotypes of the ‘prototypical immigrant’ who sells kebab and of the ‘criminal immigrant’. Both Ummar and Jonny undermine and subvert these stereotypes through stylizations and their (self-) mockery, irony and ridicule. Hence, they demonstrate their comprehension of the traditional and ongoing ethnic and social divisions in Oslo, wherein ethnicity (‘immigrant’) intersects with a ‘low’ social status job (‘selling kebab’), a social status that does not, however, prevent a certain kind of economic status (‘driving Mercedes’). The ‘East’ is thus constructed as equivalent to ‘kebab’ (selling kebab, eating kebab, speaking ‘Kebab-Norwegian’), and positioned as a contrast to the conceived posh ‘West’. Although social class is not such a hot topic among the Oslo East Enders in the Oslo data, they nonetheless refer to it more implicitly in their linguistic practices, as demonstrated in their stylizations wherein they use features from the traditional West End ‘high’ prestigious vestkantmål for ‘posh’ sounding voices. Interestingly, the stylized counterpart is not traditional østkantmål, but various voices ‘marked’ for ethnicity. Stylized voices of ethnicity and social divisions brought about in Oslo and Copenhagen In public discourses in Denmark and Norway, cultural and ethnic differences are frequently debated and current understandings of ethnic diversity imply a pervasive construction of in- and out-group relations. Social status differences are much more rarely discussed (e.g. Eide and Simonsen 2007; Pedersen 2007). It may be argued that social class differences are less salient, since they have been politically addressed through the Scandinavian welfare system, and represent as such less overt societal challenges in public discourses. Hence, class relations are not seen as the central factor for explaining societal inequalities, and consequently, social relations and integration are discussed along dimensions of ethnicity and culture rather than social class (Halldén, le Grand and Hellgren 2008). Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:24 Page Number: 229 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Stylized voices of ethnicity and social division 229 Common for the Oslo and Copenhagen data is that one of the most frequent types of stylization involves projections of stereotypes associated with ethnicity. At first glance, these findings correspond well to recent sociolinguistic studies in Copenhagen and Oslo that demonstrate that ethnic differences are becoming increasingly significant (Maegaard 2007; Opsahl and Røyneland 2009; Quist 2005). However, it becomes clear in our examples, coinciding with Jaspers’ (2011a) observations in Antwerp and Rampton’s (2009) in the UK, that ethnically marked stylizations are not necessarily about ethnic relationships, but rather indexicals of other types of social divisions and inequalities. In Oslo, the classed relationships are clearly linked to place, and in particular to the east/west dimension as a consequence of the traditional socioeconomic division (see Chapter 12). In Copenhagen, sociocultural differences are strongly associated with academic status and standard versus street speech. These differences seem to correspond well to the broader differences in the sociolinguistic developments sketched out above. A place-related understanding of sociolinguistic differences makes good sense in a Norwegian context, where language is considered to be a core value of identity (Svendsen 2004), and where dialects are used in all official domains and are considered crucial to local and social identities. In the highly standardized sociolinguistic context of Denmark there is a stronger tendency to understand all vernacular speech styles as nonstandard, and as a contrast to an academically ‘suitable’ style. However, the point we want to stress by our analyses is that our data reveal that the ‘ethnically’ marked stereotypes invoked through stylizations intersect with social divisions in subtle ways. Overall, the stylization examples from our data underline that instead of seeing class as involving a set of clearly delineable groups, it is more appropriate to approach the formation of class relationships as a processual event, which involves continuous constructions along dimensions of here/there, us/them and own/Other. Therefore, we suggest that social class as well as ethnicity and other social categories are to be approached as sociocultural (and political) interpretations signified by certain cultural and linguistic practices, rather than as existing bounded groups reflecting biological, place-related or socioeconomic facts (see also Brubaker 2004; Ortner 1998; Rampton 2006, 2011a). In times of increasing socioeconomic inequality and the recent recession in several western European states, as well as the growing extreme right-wing rhetoric and political movement across the continent (Richardson and Wodak 2009), there is a need to resurrect the notion of class within sociolinguistics to better describe contemporary social reality, and to further explore the ways Comp. by: KNarayanan Stage: Proof Chapter No.: 10 Date:28/9/14 Time:16:21:28 Page Number: 230 230 Title Name: Nortierandsvendsen Lian M Madsen & Bente A Svendsen class intersects with ethnicity as manifested in the linguistic practices in young people’s lives in the twenty first century. T RA N S CR I PT I ON C ONV E N TI O N S [overlap] LOUD xxx (questionable) ((comment)) : " (.) (0.6) Stress hhh overlapping speech louder volume than surrounding utterances unintelligible speech parts we are uncertain about our comments prolongation of preceding sound local pitch raise short pause timed pause stress laughter breath A C K N OW LED GEM ENTS The order of the author names is alphabetical. We are grateful to the adolescents who participated in our projects, and to our colleagues in the two projects: Finn Aarsæther, Ingvild Nistov, Toril Opsahl and Unn Røyneland in Oslo; Astrid Ag, Jens Normann Jørgensen, Martha Karrebæk, Janus Spindler Møller, Lamies Nassri, Thomas Nørreby and Andreas Stæhr in Copenhagen (in alphabetical order).