Few concepts are as ubiquitous in the physical world of humans as that of identity. Laws of nature crucially involve relations of identity and non-identity, the act of identifying is central to most cognitive processes, and the structure of human language is determined in many different ways by considerations of identity and its opposite. The purpose of this book is to bring together research from a broad scale of domains of grammar that have a bearing on the role that identity plays in the structure of grammatical representations and principles. Beyond a great many analytical puzzles, the creation and avoidance of identity in grammar raise a lot of fundamental and hard questions. These include: Why is identity sometimes tolerated or even necessary, while in other contexts it must be avoided? What are the properties of complex elements that contribute to configurations of identity (XX)? What structural notions of closeness or distance determine whether an offending XX-relation exists or, inversely, whether two more or less distant elements satisfy some requirement of identity? Is it possible to generalize over the specific principles that govern (non-)identity in the various components of grammar, or are such comparisons merely metaphorical? Indeed, can we define the notion of identity in a formal way that will allow us to decide which of the manifold phenomena that we can think of are genuine instances of some identity (avoidance) effect? If identity avoidance is a manifestation in grammar of some much more encompassing principle, some law of nature, then how is it possible that what does and what does not count as identical in the grammars of different languages seems to be subject to considerable variation?

The language we use forms an important part of our sense of who we are - of our identity. This book outlines the relationship between our identity as members of groups - ethnic, national, religious and gender - and the language varieties important to each group. What is a language? What is a dialect? Are there such things as language 'rights'? Must every national group have its own unique language? How have languages, large and small, been used to spread religious ideas? Why have particular religious and linguistic 'markers' been so central, singly or in combination, to the ways in which we think about ourselves and others? Using a rich variety of examples, the book highlights the linkages among languages, dialects and identities, with special attention given to religious, ethnic and national allegiances.

Style refers to ways of speaking - how speakers use the resource of language variation to make meaning in social encounters. This 2007 book develops a coherent theoretical approach to style in sociolinguistics, illustrated with copious examples. It explains how speakers project different social identities and create different social relationships through their style choices, and how speech-style and social context inter-relate. Style therefore refers to the wide range of strategic actions and performances that speakers engage in, to construct themselves and their social lives. Coupland draws on and integrates a wide variety of contemporary sociolinguistic research as well as his own extensive research in this field. The emphasis is on how social meanings are made locally, in specific relationships, genres, groups and cultures, and on studying language variation as part of the analysis of spoken discourse.

If we consider how theoretical operations belonging to the methodological inventory of linguistics are carried out (i. e. the way linguistic theories are set up), three main criteria suggest themselves for classifying them: (1) Both, nature and type of the aims of the scientific knowledge applied which allow to specify the epistemological interests as well as the theoretical impact constituting the purpose of linguistic operations; (2) the nature of the intellectual procedures in connection with which a set of intersubjectively acceptable operations should guarantee that current postulates of the theory of science be maintained; (3) the set of data serving as an empirical basis for the theories to be estab lished on the one hand and as a correlate for the further development, the testing and the evaluation of theories on the other hand. It is to be considered a basic concept (as well as a motive) of current text linguistic research that due to the linguistic analysis of discourses a further development of linguistics has set in or is still to be achieved as regards the three criteria mentioned above. Therefore, if we want to estimate text-linguistic approaches (or concepts), works (methods), or knowledge (results) we should take the view allowing for the general valuation of the linguistic discipline or one of its sub-disciplines. This should be done with respect to the contributions gathered in this volume as well.

English self-forms and related words from other Germanic languages (e.g. Dutch zelf, Swedish själv, etc.) are used in two different functions: as ‘intensifiers’ (e.g. The president himself made the decision) and as markers of reflexivity (John criticized himself). On the basis of a comparative syntactic and semantic analysis, this book addresses the question of why two such apparently different functions can be expressed by the same word. This question is answered by showing that both intensifying and reflexive self-forms can be analysed as expressing the concept of ‘identity’. In the first part of The Grammar of Identity, the most central facts concerning the distribution of intensifiers in Germanic languages are surveyed and a detailed syntactic and semantic analysis is provided. It is shown that all instances of intensifiers can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. The second part of the book offers an analysis of reflexive self-forms which is based on recent theories of reflexivity, modifying these in some important respects. In particular, the distribution of reflexive self-forms is explained with reference to semantic properties of the sentential environment. In this way, it can be shown that reflexive self-forms – like intensifiers – can be analysed as expressions of an identity function. In addition to providing a thorough comparative description of the hitherto poorly described area of intensifiers in Germanic languages, this book offers an answer to a long standing question in descriptive and theoretical linguistics, namely why self-forms are used in two apparently different functions. By combining analytical methods from syntax, lexical semantics and sentence semantics the study moreover contributes to an understanding of the interaction between structure, meaning and context in a central area of lexico-grammar.

Examining how the complex role of language affects the Creole-speaking Caribbean and the West Indian communities in London.

This volume has arisen from the 26th International LAUD Symposium on “Humboldt and Whorf Revisited. Universal and Culture-Specific Conceptualizations in Grammar and Lexis”. While contrasting two or more languages, the papers in this volume either provide empirical evidence confirming hypotheses related to linguistic relativity, or deal with methodological issues of empirical research.These new approaches to Whorf’s hypotheses do not focus on mere theorizing but provide more and more empirical evidence gathered over the last years. They prove in a very sophisticated way that Whorf’s ideas were very lucid ones, even if Whorf’s insights were framed in a terminology which lacked the flexibility of linguistic categories developed over the last quarter of this century, especially in cognitive linguistics. To date, there is sufficient proof to claim that linguistic relativity is indeed a vital issue, and the current volume confirms a more general trend for rehabilitating Whorf’s theory complex and also offers evidence for it. It contains articles written by scholars from various fields of linguistics including phonology, psycholinguistics, language acquisition, historical linguistics, anthropological linguistics and (cross-)cultural semantics, which all contribute to a re-evaluation and partial reformulation of Whorf’s thinking.