Sosyal Psikoloji ve Dilbiliminin Kesişimine Bir Bakış

Abstract

Sosyal psikoloji ve dilbilim, temel araştırma konusu olarak insanı ele alan iki bilimsel disiplindir. Bu disiplinlerin nerede buluştuğuna ve birbirini nasıl beslediğine odaklanan bu makale, sosyal psikoloji ve dilbilimin birbirine disiplinler arası katkısını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaca ulaşmak için, şu üç adımdan oluşan karşılaştırmalı analize başvurulmuştur: (1) tanımlama; (2) yan yana getirme; (3) karşılaştırma (Krzeszowski, 1990). Bu karşılaştırmalı revizyon, sosyal psikolojinin dilbilimdeki birçok temel alanı araştırdığını ve özellikle insan davranışını anlamak için veri toplama aracı ve yöntemi olarak dilden yararlandığını ortaya koymaktadır. Özellikle, sosyal psikoloji, insan davranışını incelemek ve çözümlemek için dili iletişim yönüyle tartışır. Öte yandan, dilbilim, sosyal ve davranışsal faktörlere ilişkin içgörüler sağladığı için sosyal psikolojiden yararlanır. İletişim uyumu kuramı, söz edimi kuramı, dil beklentisi kuramı, önyargı, nezaket, tepeden bakan konuşma, toplumsal cinsiyet gibi bu disiplinlerin birbirine katkı sağladığı bazı araştırma alanları ve kuramlar vardır. Bu makalenin, bu iki disiplinin kesişimine ilişkin daha geniş bir bakış açısına ve disiplinler arası eleştirel düşünmeye teşvik ederek araştırmacılara fayda sağlaması beklenmektedir.

Keywords

• İletişim
• Dil
• İnsan Davranışı
• Disiplinler Arası Katkı
• Sosyal Psikoloji
• Dilbilim

A Perspective on the Intersection of Social Psychology and Linguistics

Abstract

Social psychology and linguistics are two scientific disciplines that deal with human as their principle subject matter. Focusing on where these disciplines meet and how they feed each other, this paper aims to investigate the interdisciplinary contribution of social psychology and linguistics to each other. To achieve this, the contrastive analysis (CA) is applied which is composed of three steps as (1) description; (2) juxtaposition; (3) comparison (Krzeszowski, 1990). This comparative revision reveals that social psychology applies and investigates many fundamental areas in linguistics and particularly benefits from the language as data collection tool and method in the investigation to understand human behavior. Specifically, social psychology discusses the language with its communication aspect to examine and to analyze the human behavior. On the other hand, linguistics benefits from social psychology as it provides insights into the social and behavioral factors. There are some research areas and theories that these disciplines contribute to each other such as communication accommodation theory, speech act theory, expectancy theory, prejudice, politeness, patronizing speech, gender. Such a review is expected to benefit researchers by encouraging a wider view of intersection of these two disciplines and interdisciplinary critical thinking.

Keywords

• Communication
• Language
• Human Behavior
• Interdisciplinary Contribution
• Social Psychology
• Linguistics

References

1. Aries, E. (1996). Men and women in interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Barnlund, D. C. (1962). Toward a meaning-centered philosophy of communication. Journal of Communication, 12(4), 197-211.
3. Barnlund, D. C. (2008). A transactional model of communication. In. C. D. Mortensen (Eds.), Communication theory (pp. 47–57). New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction
4. Baron, R. A., Byrne, D., & Branscombe, N. R. (2009). Social psychology. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
5. Bell, A. (2014). The guidebook to sociolinguistics. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
6. Bradac, J.J., Bowers, J.W. & Courtright, J.A. (1979). Three language variables in communication research: Intensity, immediacy, and diversity. Human Communication Research, 5, 257-269.
7. Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Brown, R. (1965). Social psychology. New York: The Free Press

9. Burgoon, M. & Miller, G.R (1985). An expectancy interpretation of language and persuasion. In H. Giles & R. St Clair (Eds), The social and psychological contexts of language (pp. 199-229). London: Erlbaum.
10. Caporael, L. (1981). The paralanguage of caregiving: Babytalk to the institutionalized aged. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 876-884.
11. Carr, C. T., Schrock, D. B., & Dauterman, P. (2012). Speech acts within Facebook status messages. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(2), 176-196.
12. Collins, K. A., & Clément, R. (2012). Language and prejudice: Direct and moderated effects. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(4), 376-396.
13. Cooter, R. B., & Reutzel, D. R. (2004). Teaching children to read: Putting the pieces together. USA: Pearson Education.
14. Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2014). Essential social psychology. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
15. Crystal, D. (1989). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. U.K.: Basil Blackwell.
16. D’hondt, S., Ostman, J. O., & Verschueren, J. (Eds.). (2009). The pragmatics of interaction. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
17. Ebbinghaus, H. (1908). Psychology: An elementary textbook. Boston: Heath.
18. Edwards, D. (1997). Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.
19. Edwards, D., & Potter, J. (1992). Discursive psychology. London: Sage.
20. Erickson, B., Johnson, B.C., Lind, E.A. & O’Barr, W. (1978). Speech style and impression formation in a courtroom setting: The effects of “powerful” and “powerless” speech. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 266- 279.
21. Fasold, R. W., & Connor-Linton, J. (Eds.). (2014). An introduction to language and linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22. Gibbons, P., Busch, J. & Bradac, J.J. (1991). Powerful versus powerless language: Consequences for persuasion, impression, formation and cognitive response. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 10, 115-133.
23. Giles, H., Fox, S. & Smith, E. (1993). Patronizing the elderly: Intergenerational evaluations. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 2, 129-150.
24. Giles, H., & Williams, A. (1994). Patronizing the young: Forms and evaluations. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 39(1), 33-53.
25. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J.L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts (pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
26. Güney, S. (2015). Sosyal psikoloji. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık.
27. Hancock, A. B., & Rubin, B. A. (2015). Influence of communication partner’s gender on language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34(1), 46-64.
28. Holmes, J. (1992). An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.
29. Holtgraves, T. M. (2001). Language As Social Action: Social Psychology and Language Use. Lawrence Erlbaum.
30. Holtgraves, T.M., & McNamara, P. (2010). Parkinson’s disease and politeness. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29(2), 178-193.
31. Holtgraves, T. M. & Yang, J. N. (1990). Politeness as universal: Cross-cultural perceptions of request strategies and inferences based on their use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 719-729.
32. Jones, E., Gallois, C., Callan, V., & Barker, M. (1999). Strategies of accommodation: Development of a coding system for conversational interaction. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 18(2), 123-151.
33. Krzeszowski, T. P. (1990). Contrasting languages: The scope of contrastive linguistics. Walter de Gruyter.
34. Lambert, W. E., Hoodgson, R., Gardner, R.C. & Fillenbaum, S. (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 60, 44-51.
35. Lyons, J. (1981). Language and linguistics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
36. Myers, D., Abell, J. & Sani, F. (2014). Social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
37. Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10, 1-35.
38. Neuman, R., Parry, S., & Becher, T. (2002). Teaching and learning in their disciplinary contexts: A conceptual analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 27(4), 405–417.
39. Penman, R. (1990). Facework and politeness: Multiple goals in courtroom discourse. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 9, 15-38.
40. Poole, S. C. (1998). An introduction to linguistics. New York: Palgrave.
41. Potter, J. & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behavior. London: Sage.
42. Roberson, Q. M., Bell, B., & Porter, S. C. (2008). The language of bias: A linguistic approach to understanding intergroup relations. In M. A. Neale, E. A. Mannix, & K. W. Phillips (Eds.), Research on managing groups and teams: Diversity in groups (pp. 267-294). London: Emerald Publishing Group.
43. Robinson, W. P., & Giles, H. (Eds.). (2001). The new handbook of language and social psychology. New York: Wiley.
44. Shepard, C. A., Giles, H., & Le Poire, B. (2001). Communication accommodation theory. In W. P. Robinson & H. Giles (Eds.), The new handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 33–56). New York: Wiley.
45. Smith, E. R. & Mackle, D. M. (2007). Social psychology. New York: Psychology Press.
46. Stryker, S. B., & Leaver, B. L. (Eds.). (1997). Content-based instruction in foreign language education: Models and methods. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.
47. Taylor, S. E., Peplau, L. A., & Sears, D. O. (1994). Social psychology. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
48. Van Dijk, T.A. (1993). Social cognition and discourse. In H. Giles & R. P. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology and language (pp.163-183). Chichester: Wiley.
49. Weatherall, A., Watson, B., & Gallois, C. (Eds.). (2011). Language, discourse and social psychology. Hants, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
50. Wray, A., Trott, K. & Bloomer, A. (1998). Projects in linguistics: A practical guide to researching language. United States of America: Oxford University Press.
51. Yule, G. (2010). The study of language. New York: Cambridge University Press.