Sociophonetics

doi:10.1017/9781108644198.023

22 - Sociophonetics

from Section V - Applications of Phonetics

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 November 2021

Katie Drager and

Thomas Kettig

Edited by

Rachael-Anne Knight and

Jane Setter

Show author details

Rachael-Anne Knight: Affiliation:
City, University of London
Jane Setter: Affiliation:
University of Reading

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter provides an overview of research questions and methods found in sociophonetic work. We begin by providing a historical overview of the field, and then describe commonly used methods alongside the research questions they are used to explore. For those interested in teaching a course on sociophonetics, we describe how we approach teaching the course. Finally, we identify which underused methods we anticipate seeing used more widely in the coming years.

Keywords

sociophonetics sociolinguistics phonetics variation social categories production perception methods experiments

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Phonetics , pp. 551 - 577

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108644198.023 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

22.7 References

Adank, P. M., Smits, R. & van Hout, R. (2004). A comparison of vowel normalization procedures for language variation research. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 116(5), 3099–107. doi.org/10.1121/1.1795335.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ash, S. (1992). Controlling for dialect in contextless vowel identification: Revisiting the Peterson-Barney experiment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 91(4), 2386. doi.org/10.1121/1.403331.CrossRef Google Scholar

Babel, M. (2010). Dialect divergence and convergence in New Zealand English. Language in Society, 39(4), 437–56. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404510000400.CrossRef Google Scholar

Babel, M. (2012). Evidence for phonetic and social selectivity in spontaneous phonetic imitation. Journal of Phonetics, 40(1), 177–89. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2011.09.001.Google Scholar

Baker, A., Archangeli, D. & Mielke, J. (2011). Variability in American English s-retraction suggests a solution to the actuation problem. Language Variation and Change, 23(3), 347–74. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394511000135.Google Scholar

Baranowski, M. (2013). Sociophonetics. In Bayley, R., Cameron, R. & Lucas, C., eds., Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 403–24.Google Scholar

Beckner, C., Rácz, P., Hay, J., Brandstetter, J. & Bartneck, C. (2016). Participants conform to humans but not to humanoid robots in an English past tense formation task. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(2), 158–79. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15584682.Google Scholar

Blackwood Ximenes, A., Shaw, J. A. & Carignan, C. (2017). A comparison of acoustic and articulatory methods for analyzing vowel differences across dialects: Data from American and Australian English. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(1), 363–77. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991346.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Boersma, P. & Weenink, D. (2017). Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer [computer program]. Version 6.0.33, www.praat.org/.Google Scholar

Bowie, D. (2000). Perception and production in processes of merger. Proceedings of the Deseret Language and Linguistic Society Symposium, 26(1), 137–43. scholarsarchive.byu.edu/dlls/vol26/iss1/18.Google Scholar

Campbell-Kibler, K. (2007). Accent, (ING), and the social logic of listener perceptions. American Speech, 82(1), 32–64. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–2007-002.Google Scholar

Campbell-Kibler, K. (2011). Intersecting variables and perceived sexual orientation in men. American Speech, 86(1), 52–68. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–1277510.Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Clark, L. (2009). Variation, Change and the Usage-Based Approach. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.Google Scholar

Clark, L. (2014). Phonological repetition effects in natural conversation: Evidence from TH-fronting in Fife. In Lawson, R., ed., Sociolinguistics in Scotland. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 153–76.Google Scholar

Clopper, C. G., Pierrehumbert, J. B. & Tamati, T. N. (2010). Lexical neighborhoods and phonological confusability in cross-dialect word recognition in noise. Laboratory Phonology, 1(1), 65–92. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2010.005.CrossRef Google Scholar

Corneau, C. (2000). An EPG study of palatalization in French: cross-dialect and inter-subject variation. Language Variation and Change, 12(1), 25–49.Google Scholar

Costa, P. & Mattingly, I. G. (1981). Production and perception of phonetic contrast during phonetic change. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 69, 191–6. doi.org/10.1121/1.386167.Google Scholar

Coupland, N. (1980). Style-shifting in a Cardiff work-setting. Language in Society, 9(1), 1–12. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500007752.Google Scholar

Coupland, N. (2014). Social context, style, and identity in sociolinguistics. In Holmes, J. & Hazen, K., eds., Research Methods in Sociolinguistics: A Practical Guide. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 290–303.Google Scholar

De Decker, P. (2010). Sounds shifty: Gender and age differences in perceptual categorization during a phonetic change in progress. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 15(2), 50–60.Google Scholar

De Decker, P. & Mackenzie, S. (2017). Tracking the phonological status of /l/ in Newfoundland English: Experiments in articulation and acoustics. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(350), 350–62. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991349.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

De Decker, P. & Nycz, J. (2012). Are tense [æ]s really tense? The mapping between articulation and acoustics. Lingua, 122(7), 810–21. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2012.01.003.Google Scholar

De Decker, P. & Nycz, J. (2013). The technology of conducting sociolinguistic interviews. In Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G., eds., Data Collection in Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 118–26.Google Scholar

DiPaolo, M. & Yaeger-Dror, M. (2011). Sociophonetics: A Student’s Guide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

D’Onofrio, A. (2015). Persona-based information shapes linguistic perception: Valley girls and California vowels. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19(2), 241–56. doi.org/10.1111/josl.12115.Google Scholar

D’Onofrio, A. (2016). Social Meaning in Linguistic Perception. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar

Docherty, G., Langstrof, C. & Foulkes, P. (2013). Listener evaluation of sociophonetic variability: Probing constraints and capabilities. Linguistics, 51(2), 355–80. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013–0014.Google Scholar

Docherty, G., Foulkes, P., Gonzalez, S. & Mitchell, N. (2018). Missed connections at the junction of sociolinguistics and speech processing. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 759–74. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12375.Google Scholar

Drager, K. (2010). Sensitivity to grammatical and sociophonetic variability in perception. Laboratory Phonology, 1(1), 93–120. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2010.006.Google Scholar

Drager, K. (2011). Speaker age and vowel perception. Language and Speech, 54(1), 99–121. doi.org/10.1177/0023830910388017.Google Scholar

Drager, K. (2018). Experimental Research Methods in Sociolinguistics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Drager, K., Hay, J. & Walker, A. (2010). Pronounced rivalries: Attitudes and speech perception. Te Reo, 53, 27–53.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(4), 453–76. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2008.00374.x.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41, 87–100. doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611–145828.Google Scholar

Eckert, P. & Labov, W. (2017). Phonetics, phonology and social meaning. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 21(4), 467–96. doi.org/10.1111/josl.12244.Google Scholar

Floccia, C., Goslin, J., Girard, F. & Konopcznski, G. (2006). Does a regional accent perturb speech processing? Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(5), 1276–93. doi.org/10.1037/0096–1523.32.5.1276.Google Scholar

Foulkes, P. & Docherty, G. (2006). The social life of phonetics and phonology. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 409–38. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.08.002.Google Scholar

Foulkes, P., Docherty, G. & Watt, D. (1999). Tracking the emergence of sociophonetic variation. In Proceedings of the International Congress of the Phonetic Sciences 99, San Francisco, pp. 1625–8.Google Scholar

Foulkes, P., Scobbie, J. M. & Watt, D. J. L. (2010). Sociophonetics. In Hardcastle, W., Laver, J. & Gibbon, F., eds., Handbook of Phonetic Sciences, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 703–54.Google Scholar

Fridland, V. & Kendall, T. (2012). Exploring the relationship between production and perception in the mid front vowels of US English. Lingua, 122(7), 779–93. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.12.007.Google Scholar

German, J. S., Carlson, K & Pierrehumbert, J. B. (2013). Reassignment of consonant allophones in rapid dialect acquisition. Journal of Phonetics, 41(3/4), 228–48. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2013.03.001.Google Scholar

Gooskens, C., Heeringa, W. & Beijering, K. (2008). Phonetic and lexical predictors of intelligibility. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, 2(1–2), 63–81. doi.org/10.3366/E1753854809000317.Google Scholar

Gordon, E., Campbell, L., Hay, J., Maclagan, M., Sudbury, A. & Trudgill, P. (2004). New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Gratton, C. (2017). Non-binary identity construction and intraspeaker variation. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, Austin, TX, 7 January.Google Scholar

Guy, G. R. (1991). Contextual conditioning in variable lexical phonology. Language Variation and Change, 3(2), 223–39. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000533.Google Scholar

Hall-Lew, L. (2013). ‘Flip-flop’ and mergers-in-progress. English Language and Linguistics, 17(2), 359–90. doi.org/10.1017/S1360674313000063.CrossRef Google Scholar

Hall-Lew, L. & Fix, S. (2012). Perceptual coding reliability of (L)-vocalization in casual speech data. Lingua, 122(7), 794–809. doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2011.12.005.Google Scholar

Hall-Lew, L. & Plichta, B. (2013). Technological challenges in sociolinguistic data collection. In Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G., eds., Data Collection in Sociolinguistics. New York: Routledge, pp. 127–30.Google Scholar

Hardeman Guthrie, K. (2016). Gender and second language style: American learner perceptions of Mandarin sajiao. Asia Pacific Language Variation, 2(2), 157–87. doi.org/10.1075/aplv.2.2.03har.Google Scholar

Harrington, J., Palethorpe, S. & Watson, C. (2000). Monophthongal vowel changes in Received Pronunciation: An acoustic analysis of the Queen’s Christmas broadcasts. Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 30(1/2), 63–78. doi.org/10.1017/S0025100300006666.Google Scholar

Hay, J. & Drager, K. (2007). Sociophonetics. Annual Review of Anthropology, 36, 89–103. doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.34.081804.120633.Google Scholar

Hay, J. & Drager, K. (2010). Stuffed toys and speech perception. Linguistics, 48(4), 865–92. doi.org/10.1515/ling.2010.027.Google Scholar

Hay, J. & Foulkes, P. (2016). The evolution of medial /t/ over real and remembered time. Language, 92(2), 298–330. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0036.Google Scholar

Hay, J., Warren, P. & Drager, K. (2006). Factors influencing speech perception in the context of a merger-in-progress. Journal of Phonetics, 34(4), 458–84. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.10.001.Google Scholar

Hildebrandt, K. A., Jany, C. & Silva, W. (2017). Introduction: Documenting variation in endangered languages. Language Documentation & Conservation, 13, 1–5. hdl.handle.net/10125/24746.Google Scholar

Holliday, N. (2016). Identity performance among Black/biracial men through intonation: Examining pitch accent and peak delay. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 22(2), 71–80.Google Scholar

Holliday, N. (2017). ‘My presiden(t) and firs(t) lady were Black’: Style, context, and coronal stop deletion in the speech of Barack and Michelle Obama. American Speech, 92(4), 459–86. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–6903954.Google Scholar

Holmquist, J. C. (1985). Social correlates of a linguistic variable: A study in a Spanish village. Language in Society, 14(2), 192–203. doi.org/10.1017/S004740450001112X.Google Scholar

Huettig, F., Rommers, J. & Meyer, A. S. (2011). Using the visual world paradigm to study language processing: A review and critical evaluation. Acta Psychologica, 137(2), 151–71. doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.11.003.Google Scholar

Jacewicz, E. & Fox, R. A. (2012). The effects of cross-generational and cross-dialectal variation on vowel identification and classification. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 131(2), 1413–33. doi.org/10.1121/1.3676603.Google Scholar

Janson, T. (1983). Sound change in perception and production. Language, 59(1), 18–34. doi.org/10.2307/414059.Google Scholar

Janson, T. & Schulman, R. (1983). Non-distinctive features and their use. Journal of Linguistics, 19(2), 321–36. doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700007763.Google Scholar

Kendall, T. (2013). Speech Rate, Pause, and Sociolinguistic Variation: Studies in Corpus Sociophonetics. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kettig, T. & Winter, B. (2017). Producing and perceiving the Canadian Vowel Shift: Evidence from a Montreal community. Language Variation and Change, 29(1), 79–100. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394517000023.Google Scholar

Khattab, G. (2013). Phonetic convergence and divergence strategies in English–Arabic bilingual children. Linguistics, 51(2), 439–72. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2013–0017.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kiesling, S. F. (2009). Style as stance: Stance as the explanation for patterns of sociolinguistic variation. In Jaffe, A., ed., Stance: Sociolinguistic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 171–94.Google Scholar

Kim, J. & Drager, K. (2017). Sociophonetic realizations guide subsequent lexical access. In Proceedings of INTERSPEECH 2017, pp. 621–25. doi.org/10.21437/INTERSPEECH.2017–1742.CrossRef Google Scholar

Kim, J. & Drager, K. (2018). Rapid influence of word-talker associations on lexical access. Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 775–86. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12351.Google Scholar

Kirtley, M. J. (2015). Language, Identity, and Non-Binary Gender in Hawaiʻi. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI.Google Scholar

Kleinschmidt, D. F., Weatherholtz, K. & Jaeger, T. F. (2018). Sociolinguistic perception as inference under uncertainty, Topics in Cognitive Science, 10(4), 818–34. doi.org/10.1111/tops.12331.Google Scholar

Koops, C., Gentry, E. & Pantos, A. (2008). The effect of perceived speaker age on the perception of PIN and PEN vowels in Houston, Texas. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 14, 93–101.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1963). The social motivation of a sound change. Word, 19(3), 273–309. doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1963.11659799.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45(4), 715–62. doi.org/10.2307/412333.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (2006) [1966]. The Social Stratification of English in New York City, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W., Yaeger, M. & Steiner, R. (1972). A Quantitative Study of Sound Change in Progress. Report on National Science Foundation Contract NSF-GS-3287.Google Scholar

Labov, W., Ash, S. & Boberg, C. (2006). Atlas of North American English: Phonology and Phonetics. Berlin: Mouton/de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Labov, W., Ash, S., Ravindranath, M., Weldon, T. & Nagy, N. (2011). Properties of the sociolinguistic monitor. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(4), 431–63. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2011.00504.x.Google Scholar

Labov, W., Rosenfelder, I. & Fruehwald, J. (2013). One hundred years of sound change in Philadelphia: Linear incrementation, reversal, and reanalysis. Language, 89(1), 30–65. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2013.0015.Google Scholar

Ladefoged, P. & Broadbent, D. E. (1957). Information conveyed by vowels. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 29(1), 98–104. doi.org/10.1121/1.1908694.Google Scholar

Lambert, W. E., Hodgson, R. C., Gardner, R. C. & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60(1), 44–51. doi.org/10.1037/h0044430.Google Scholar

Lawson, E., Scobbie, J. M. & Stuart-Smith, J. (2011). The social stratification of tongue shape for postvocalic /r/ in Scottish English. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(2), 256–68. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2011.00464.x.Google Scholar

Leemann, A. (2017). Analyzing geospatial variation in articulation rate using crowdsourced speech data. Journal of Linguistic Geography, 4(2), 76–96. doi.org/10.1017/jlg.2016.11.Google Scholar

Leemann, A., Kolly, M. J. & Britain, D. (2016). English Dialects, iPhone app. Accessed 28 June 2017 from itunes.apple.com/us/app/english-dialects/id882340404?mt=8.Google Scholar

Lev-Ari, S. & Peperkamp, S. (2014). An experimental study of the role of social factors in language change: The case of loanword adaptations. Laboratory Phonology, 5(3), 379–401. doi.org/10.1515/lp-2014–0013.Google Scholar

Levon, E. (2007). Sexuality in context: Variation and the sociolinguistic perception of identity. Language in Society, 36, 533–54. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404507070431.Google Scholar

Levon, E. (2014). Categories, stereotypes, and the linguistic perception of sexuality. Language in Society, 43(5), 539–66. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404514000554.Google Scholar

Llamas, C. & Watt, D. (2014). Scottish, English, British? Innovations in attitude measurement. Language and Linguistics Compass, 8(11), 610–17. doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12109.Google Scholar

Llamas, C., Watt, D. & Johnson, D. E. (2009). Linguistic accommodation and the salience of national identity markers in a border town. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 28(4), 381–407. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09341962.Google Scholar

Llompart, M. & Simonet, M. (2018). Unstressed vowel reduction across Majorcan Catalan dialects: Production and spoken word recognition. Language and Speech, 61(3), 430–65. doi.org/10.1177/0023830917736019.Google Scholar

Maegaard, M. (2010). Linguistic practice and stereotypes among Copenhagen adolescents. In Quist, P. & Svendsen, B. A., eds., Multilingual Urban Scandinavia: New Linguistic Practices. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 189–206.Google Scholar

Mallinson, C., Childs, B. & Van Herk, G. (2013). Data Collection in Sociolinguistics: Methods and Applications. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

McCloy, D. (2016). phonR: Tools for phoneticians and phonologists, R-package version 1.0–7.Google Scholar

McGowan, K. (2011). The Role of Socioindexical Expectation in Speech Perception. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar

McGowan, K. (2015). Social expectation improves speech perception in noise. Language and Speech, 58(4), 1–20. doi.org/10.1177/0023830914565191.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Mendoza-Denton, N. (2008). Homegirls: Language and Cultural Practice among Latina Youth Gangs. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Meyerhoff, M. (2017). Writing a linguistic symphony: Analyzing variation while doing language documentation. The Canadian Journal of Linguistics, 62(4), 525–49. doi.org/10.1017/cnj.2017.28.Google Scholar

Mielke, J. (2015). An ultrasound study of Canadian French rhotic vowels with polar smoothing spline comparisons. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 137(5), 2858–69. doi.org/10.1121/1.4919346.Google Scholar

Mielke, J., Carignan, C. & Thomas, E. R. (2017). The articulatory dynamics of pre-velar and pre-nasal /æ/-raising in English: An ultrasound study. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 142(1), 332–49. doi.org/10.1121/1.4991348.Google Scholar

Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1978). Belfast: Change and variation in an urban vernacular. In Trudgill, P., ed., Sociolinguistic Patterns in British English. London: Edward Arnold, pp. 19–36.Google Scholar

Mougeon, R. & Nadasdi, T. (1998). Sociolinguistic discontinuity in minority language communities. Language 74(1), 40–55. doi.org/10.1353/lan.1998.0077.Google Scholar

Munson, B. (2011). The influence of actual and imputed talker gender on fricative perception, revisited. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 130(5), 2631–4. doi.org/10.1121/1.3641410.Google Scholar

Nagy, N. (2017). Documenting variation in (endangered) heritage languages: How and why? Language Documentation and Conservation Special Publication, 13, 33–64. hdl.handle.net/10125/24748.Google Scholar

Niedzielski, N. (1999). The effect of social information on the perception of sociolinguistic variables. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 62–85. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001005.Google Scholar

Nycz, J. (2015). Second dialect acquisition: A sociophonetic perspective. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9(11), 469–82. doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12163.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pardo, J. S. (2012). Reflections on phonetic convergence: Speech perception does not mirror speech production. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6(12), 753–67. doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.367.Google Scholar

Pharao, N., Maegaard, M., Møller, J. S. & Kristiansen, T. (2014). Indexical meanings of [s+] among Copenhagen youth: Social perception of a phonetic variant in different prosodic contexts. Language in Society, 43(1), 1–31. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404513000857.Google Scholar

Pierrehumbert, J. (2006). The next toolkit. Journal of Phonetics, 34(6), 516–30. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2006.06.003.Google Scholar

Pitt, M. A., Dilley, L., Johnson, K., Kiesling, S., Raymond, W., Hume, E. et al. (2007). Buckeye Corpus of Conversational Speech, 2nd release, Columbus, OH: Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University. www.buckeyecorpus.osu.edu/.Google Scholar

Podesva, R. J. (2007). Phonation type as a stylistic variable: The use of falsetto in constructing a persona. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(4), 478–504. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2007.00334.x.Google Scholar

Podesva, R. J. (2011). Salience and the social meaning of declarative contours: Three case studies of gay professionals. Journal of English Linguistics, 39(3), 233–64. doi.org/10.1177/0075424211405161.Google Scholar

Purnell, T., Idsardi, W. & Baugh, J. (1999). Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(1), 10–30. doi.org/10.1177/0261927X99018001002.Google Scholar

Rickford, J. R. & McNair-Knox, F. (1994). Addressee- and topic- influenced style shift: A quantitative sociolinguistic study. In Biber, D. & Finegan, E., eds., Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Register. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 235–76.Google Scholar

Rubin, D. L. (1992). Nonlanguage factors affecting undergraduates’ judgments of nonnative English-speaking teaching assistants. Research in Higher Education, 33(4), 511–31.Google Scholar

Sankoff, D. (1975). VARBRUL version 2, Unpublished program and documentation.Google Scholar

Scanlon, M. & Wassink, A. B. (2010). African American English in urban Seattle: Accommodation and intraspeaker variation in the Pacific Northwest. American Speech, 85(2), 205–24. doi.org/10.1215/00031283–2010-011.Google Scholar

Schilling-Estes, N. (2004). Constructing ethnicity in interaction. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 8(2), 163–95. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2004.00257.x.Google Scholar

Schüppert, A., Hilton, N. H. & Gooskens, C. (2015). Swedish is beautiful, Danish is ugly? Investigating the link between language attitudes and spoken word recognition. Linguistics, 53(2), 375–403. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015–0003.Google Scholar

Scobbie, J. M., Lawson, E. & Stuart-Smith, J. (2012). Back to front: A socially-stratified ultrasound tongue imaging study of Scottish English /u/. Rivista di Linguistica/Italian Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 103–48.Google Scholar

Sonderegger, M., Bane, M. & Graff, P. (2017). The medium-term dynamics of accents, on reality television. Language, 93(3), 598–640. doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0038.Google Scholar

Sóskuthy, M. (2017). Generalised Additive Mixed Models for dynamic analysis in linguistics: A practical introduction. arxiv.org/abs/1703.05339.Google Scholar

Staum Casasanto, L., Jasmin, K. & Casasanto, D. (2010). Virtually accommodating: Speech rate accommodation to a virtual interlocutor. In Ohlsson, S. & Catrambone, R., eds., Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, pp. 127–32.Google Scholar

Strand, E. & Johnson, K. (1996). Gradient and visual speaker normalization in the perception of fricatives. In Gibbon, D., ed. Natural Language Processing and Speech Technology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 14–26.Google Scholar

Sumner, M. & Samuel, A. G. (2009). The effect of experience on the perception and representation of dialect variants. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 487–501. doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.01.001.Google Scholar

Szakay, A. (2012). Voice quality as a marker of ethnicity in New Zealand: From acoustics to perception. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(3), 382–97. doi.org/10.1111/j.1467–9841.2012.00537.x.Google Scholar

Szakay, A., Babel, M. & King, J. (2016). Social categories are shared across bilinguals’ lexicons. Journal of Phonetics, 59, 92–109. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.005.Google Scholar

Tamminga, M. (2014). Persistence in the Production of Linguistic Variation. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.Google Scholar

Tamminga, M. (2017). Matched guise effects can be robust to speech style. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Express Letters, 142(1), EL18–EL23. doi.org/10.1121/1.4990399.Google Scholar

Thomas, E. R. (1997). A rural/metropolitan split in the speech of Texas Anglos. Language Variation and Change, 9(3), 309–32. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500001940.Google Scholar

Thomas, E. R. (2000). Spectral differences in /ai/ offsets conditioned by voicing of the following consonant. Journal of Phonetics, 28(1), 1–25. doi.org/10.1006/jpho.2000.0103.Google Scholar

Thomas, E. R. (2002). Instrumental phonetics. In Chambers, J. K., Trudgill, P. & Schilling-Estes, N., eds., The Handbook of Language Variation and Change. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 168–200.Google Scholar

Thomas, E. R. (2011). Sociophonetics: An Introduction. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar

Thomas, E. R. & Kendall, T. (2007). NORM: The vowel normalization and plotting suite, ncslaap.lib.ncsu.edu/tools/norm/.Google Scholar

Trudgill, P. (1974). The Social Differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Van Hofwegen, J. (2017). Everyday Styles: Investigating the Full Scope of Variation in the Life of an Individual Speaker. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.Google Scholar

Vaux, B. & Golder, S. (2003). The Harvard Dialect Survey. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Linguistics Department.Google Scholar

Walker, A. & Campbell-Kibler, K. (2015). Repeat after whom? Exploring variable selectivity in a cross-dialectal shadowing task. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(546), 1–18. doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00546.Google Scholar

Walker, A. & Hay, J. (2011). Congruence between ‘word age’ and ‘voice age’ facilitates lexical access. Laboratory Phonology, 2(1), 219–37. doi.org/10.1515/labphon.2011.007.Google Scholar

Walker, A., Hay, J., Drager, K. & Sanchez, K. (2017). Divergence in speech perception. Linguistics, 56(1), 257–78. doi.org/10.1515/ling-2017–0036.Google Scholar

Warren, P. (2014). Sociophonetic and prosodic influences on judgments of sentence types. In Hay, J. & Parnell, E., eds., Proceedings of the 15th Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology. Christchurch: ASSTA, pp. 185–8.Google Scholar

Wassink, A. B. (2015). Sociolinguistic patterns in Seattle English. Language Variation and Change, 27(1), 31–58. doi.org/10.1017/S0954394514000234.Google Scholar

Watson, K. & Clark, L. (2015). Exploring listeners’ real-time reactions to regional accents. Language Awareness, 24(1), 38–59. doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2014.882346.Google Scholar

Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? Word, 10(2–3), 388–400. doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1954.11659535.Google Scholar

Wells, J. C. (1982). Accents of English, vol. 1, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wieling, M., Tomaschek, F., Arnold, D., Tiede, M., Bröker, F., Thiele, S. et al. (2016). Investigating dialectal differences using articulography. Journal of Phonetics, 59, 122–43. doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2016.09.004.Google Scholar

Willis, C. (1972). Perception of vowel phonemes in Fort Erie, Ontario, Canada, and Buffalo, New York: An application of synthetic vowel categorization tests to dialectology. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 15(2), 246–55. dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.1502.246.Google Scholar

Wolfram, W. (1969). A Sociolinguistic Description of Detroit Negro English. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar

Yaeger-Dror, M. & Thomas, E. R. (2009). African American English Speakers and Their Participation in Local Sound Changes: A Comparative Study. Publication of the American Dialect Society (PADS) 94(1). Durham, NC: Duke University Press. doi.org/10.1215/-94–1-1.Google Scholar

Yaeger-Dror, M., Takano, S., Granadillo, T. & Hall-Lew, L. (2011). The sociophonetics of prosodic contours on NEG in three language communities: Teasing apart sociolinguistic and phonetic influences on speech. In Preston, D. & Niedzielski, N., eds., Sociophonetic Reader. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 133–76.Google Scholar

Zhang, Q. (2005). A Chinese yuppie in Beijing: Phonological variation and the construction of a new professional identity. Language in Society, 34(3), 431–66. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404505050153.Google Scholar

Zimman, L. (2017). Gender as stylistic bricolage: Transmasculine voices and the relationship between fundamental frequency and /s/. Language in Society, 46(3), 339–70. doi.org/10.1017/S0047404517000070.Google Scholar