A social network is essentially a community of language users.
There are many social networks such as:
close or extended family
different friendship groups
sports teammates or people you practice hobbies with
colleagues
academic peers
Structure
Relationships There are multiple ways to describe the structure of a social network. Among them are density, member closeness centrality, multiplexity, and orders. These metrics measure the different ways of connecting within of a network, and when used together they provide a complete picture of the structure of a particular network.
A social network is defined as either "loose" or "tight" depending on how connected its members are with each other, as measured by factors like density and multiplexity. This measure of tightness is essential to the study of socially motivated language change because the tightness of a social network correlates with lack of innovation in the population's speech habits. Conversely, a loose network is more likely to innovate linguistically.
Density The density of a given social network is found by dividing the number of all existing links between the actors by the number of potential links within the same set of actors.The higher the resulting number, the denser a network is. Dense networks are most likely to be found in small, stable communities with few external contacts and a high degree of social cohesion. Loose social networks, by contrast, are more liable to develop in larger, unstable communities that have many external contacts and exhibit a relative lack of social cohesion
Orders are a way of defining the place of a speaker within a social network. Actors are classified into three different zones depending on the strength of their connection to a certain actor.The closer an individual's connection to the central member is, the more powerful an individual will be within their network. Social network theories of language change look for correlation between a speaker's order and their use of prestigious or non-prestigious linguistic variants.
Orders Second order zone A second order zone is a grouping of any individuals who are connected to at least one actor within the first order zone. However, actors in the second order zone are not directly connected to the central member of the network. A second order member has a loose or indirect connection to the network, and may only be connected to a certain network member.
Third order zone A third order zone is made up of newly observed individuals not directly connected to the first order zone. Third order members may be connected to actors in the second order zone, but not the first. They are peripheral members of the network, and are often the actors with the lowest member closeness centrality, since they may not have frequent contact with other members of the network.
First order zone A first order zone is composed of all individuals that are directly linked to any given individual. The first order zone can also be referred to as the "interpersonal environment"[8] or "neighborhood". A first order member of a network is an actor who has a large number of direct connections to the center of the network.
Social networks are required in sociolinguistic investigations in order to give researchers information on how social factors relate to one another and to different language features.
the concept of the social network is used to examine the links between the strength of network ties and the use of a linguistic variant to create an accurate picture of a community's language use.
How do social networks actually affect language?
The answer to this question is multifaceted and will depend on which social factors are at play within the social network. These are some of the most significant social factors that can impact language use within a social network:
gender
ethnicity
age
social class
occupation
women are more supportive, understanding, intimate, emotional, and interested in compromise and proposals rather than men whose language tends to be more competitive, assertive, independent, informational, and commanding.
Language and gender Rob Drummond (2012)2 looked at two groups of Polish immigrants living in the UK: one group that intended to stay in the UK, and one group that intended to go back to Poland. He found that the group that intended to stay spoke with a less pronounced Polish accent than the group that wanted to leave the UK. This study illustrated how ethnic ties and the desire to integrate can conversely affect language.
Language and ethnicity Language and age Jenny Cheshire (1987)3 observed that language across different age groups changed according to the life events, social attitudes, and other significant moments experienced by a person.
For instance:
*getting married
*starting a family
*reaching new career milestones
*moving to a new city or country
Peter Trudgill (1974)4 investigated the relationship between social class and language variation in the city of Norwich. He concluded that people from lower social classes tended to use more non-standard language features and varieties when compared with people from higher social classes who often used language closer to prestige forms.
Language and social class Language and Occupation Drew and Heritage (1992)5 considered how hierarchies in organisations both impact and are impacted by language use. They found that colleagues often share implicit ways of behaving and interacting and that hierarchies can lead to asymmetrical language use that further cements the imbalance of power.
