Linguistic Anthropoid of using language, for example in school, at based on rational used to mitigate ' face ork, in church, at play. Among the various forms of threatening acts. eness and Language). In secondary socialization, literacy has occupied this theory, languag crucial role in mediating mportant role in linguistic anthropology. The work of differences in power owing the benefits of an ethnographic study of h Other approaches have stressed the lack of control Shirley Brice Heath(1983) has been very influential in iteracy practices in the home, where children are example, the analysis of traditional oratory by posed to literacy in ways that may or may not be Maurice Bloch defined it as a coercing system within precursors of the type of activities they will encounter which speakers could only reproduce the existing power relations. Earlier work on language and gender also uncovered some of the implications in linguistic codes and linguistic routines that are nsible for 4.2 Multilingualism: New Perspectives on Contact defining female speakers not only as different, but as weak, unassertive, or submissive(see Language and In the 1980s the writings of Mikhael Bakhtin (and one Gender). More recent work has questioned some of of his alter egos, Valentin Voloshinov) were par ticularly influential for their conceptualization of women, and stressed the importance of careful analysis of face-to-face encounters. Marjorie H. Goodwin meaning as a joint activity, the attention given to(1990)found the girls in her study as assertive and coexisting styles and voices within the same 'text, ar confrontational as boys. But she also discovered that the identification of both centripetal(toward unity there were some differences in the interactional stra nd standardization) and centrifugal forces(away from unity and standardization) in language use. The egles used by boys and girls. Among girls, offenses notion of a unitary language then becomes both were constructed out of reported deeds, and especiall reported speech, by absent parties (in the so-called empirically and ideologically suspect because it hides he-said-she-said' sequences) from us the inequality inherent in any linguistic As researchers improve their understanding of the effects of the juxtaposition of multiple voices and subtle functioning of different language varieties(e. g coexisting language varieties. Bakhtins work inspired codes, dialects, registers, genres, styles)in the defin- ition of social identities(e. g, gender, race, ethnicity) a number of linguistic anthropologists including Jane they unveil the active roles that speakers play in nd Kenneth (1986), who introduced the notion adapting existing linguistic resources to their inter- of syncretic language to describe the grammars that takes place in contemporary Mexicano actional goals, and their ability simultaneously to (Nahuatl)(see Code Switching: Linguistic). Even when ndex multiple social worlds and their associated speakers are no longer considered bilingual, some dentities(Hall and Bucholtz 1995, Zentella 1997) aspects of their "lost language and its cultural contexts The power of new technologies in the definition of are maintained, sometimes in occasional code switches persons and their rights was a central theme of Michel and in a variety of other hybrid constructions. It is the asylums and other institutions that dealt with health in task of the researcher to find out what survives of the France. In a similar vein, but using detailed analysis of old code and under what conditions it reappears in poken or written discourse Communities differ in the face-to-face encounters in which participants com- extent to which they recognize the presence of alter- municate through talk, gestures, and the use of native ways of speaking. Ideological positions based material artifacts, Charles Goodwin(1994)identified a series of interpretive procedures (e on linguistic purism, enforcement of national identity, .highlighting)which use particular types ofinscription and control over ethnic boundaries play an important techniques to constitute what he calls professional role in the types ge varieties that are supported or oppressed(Schieffelin et al. 1998). vIsIon 5. Methods 4.3 Power and Control In the last few decades of the twentieth century, there made without encounter a cultura The study of speaking ing the issue of how language documenting language use. Whereas descriptions of can be used to control the action of others. A number verbal activities such as greetings, proverbs, insults, dealt with this issue observation or on work with native speakers, toda Building on Goffman's notion of face work and researchers are expected to have recordings of ex Stephen Levinson(1987, first published in 1978) occurring spontaneously. As the technology for e are Grice's conversational maxims, Penelope Brown and changes in which the phenomena they descri presented a theory of politeness as a set of strategies documentation improves and becomes more accessnew ways of using language, for example in school, at work, in church, at play. Among the various forms of ‘secondary socialization,’ literacy has occupied an important role in linguistic anthropology. The work of Shirley Brice Heath (1983) has been very influential in showing the benefits of an ethnographic study of literacy practices in the home, where children are exposed to literacy in ways that may or may not be precursors of the type of activities they will encounter in school. 4.2 Multilingualism: New PerspectiŠes on Contact and Change In the 1980s the writings of Mikhael Bakhtin (and one of his alter egos, Valentin Voloshinov) were par￾ticularly influential for their conceptualization of meaning as a joint activity, the attention given to coexisting styles and voices within the same ‘text,’ and the identification of both centripetal (toward unity and standardization) and centrifugal forces (away from unity and standardization) in language use. The notion of a unitary language then becomes both empirically and ideologically suspect because it hides from us the inequality inherent in any linguistic system, as well as the potential and actual aesthetic effects of the juxtaposition of multiple voices and coexisting language varieties. Bakhtin’s work inspired a number of linguistic anthropologists including Jane and Kenneth Hill (1986), who introduced the notion of syncretic language to describe the mixing of grammars that takes place in contemporary Mexicano (Nahuatl) (see Code Switching: Linguistic). Even when speakers are no longer considered bilingual, some aspects of their ‘lost’ language and its cultural contexts are maintained, sometimes in occasional code switches and in a variety of other hybrid constructions. It is the task of the researcher to find out what survives of the old code and under what conditions it reappears in spoken or written discourse. Communities differ in the extent to which they recognize the presence of alter￾native ways of speaking. Ideological positions based on linguistic purism, enforcement of national identity, and control over ethnic boundaries play an important role in the types of language varieties that are supported or oppressed (Schieffelin et al. 1998). 4.3 Power and Control The study of speaking as a cultural practice cannot be made without encountering the issue of how language can be used to control the action of others. A number of contributions within linguistic anthropology have dealt with this issue. Building on Goffman’s notion of ‘face work’ and Grice’s conversational maxims, Penelope Brown and Stephen Levinson (1987, first published in 1978) presented a theory of politeness as a set of strategies based on rational principles used to mitigate ‘face threatening acts.’ (see Politeness and Language). In this theory, language plays a crucial role in mediating differences in power between speakers. Other approaches have stressed the lack of control that speakers have over their linguistic resources. For example, the analysis of traditional oratory by Maurice Bloch defined it as a coercing system within which speakers could only reproduce the existing power relations. Earlier work on language and gender also uncovered some of the implications in linguistic codes and linguistic routines that are responsible for defining female speakers not only as different, but as weak, unassertive, or submissive (see Language and Gender). More recent work has questioned some of these findings, at least as generalized statements about women, and stressed the importance of careful analysis of face-to-face encounters. Marjorie H. Goodwin (1990) found the girls in her study as assertive and confrontational as boys. But she also discovered that there were some differences in the interactional stra￾tegies used by boys and girls. Among girls, offenses were constructed out of reported deeds, and especially reported speech, by absent parties (in the so-called ‘he-said-she-said’ sequences). As researchers improve their understanding of the subtle functioning of different language varieties (e.g., codes, dialects, registers, genres, styles) in the defin￾ition of social identities (e.g., gender, race, ethnicity), they unveil the active roles that speakers play in adapting existing linguistic resources to their inter￾actional goals, and their ability simultaneously to index multiple social worlds and their associated identities (Hall and Bucholtz 1995, Zentella 1997). The power of new technologies in the definition of persons and their rights was a central theme of Michel Foucault’s historical analysis of the development of asylums and other institutions that dealt with health in France. In a similar vein, but using detailed analysis of face-to-face encounters in which participants com￾municate through talk, gestures, and the use of material artifacts, Charles Goodwin (1994) identified a series of interpretive procedures (e.g., ‘coding,’ ‘highlighting’) which use particular types of inscription techniques to constitute what he calls ‘professional vision.’ 5. Methods In the last few decades of the twentieth century, there was considerable improvement in the tools used in documenting language use. Whereas descriptions of verbal activities such as greetings, proverbs, insults, and speechmaking used to be based on participant observation or on work with native speakers, today researchers are expected to have recordings of ex￾changes in which the phenomena they describe are occurring spontaneously. As the technology for visual documentation improves and becomes more access- 8904 Linguistic Anthropology