1887
image of Vos and tú in the linguistic landscape
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Although is common in speech in Medellín, it is considered non-prestigious for writing ( ). Nonetheless, is an important marker of local identity ( ) that increasingly appears in writing ( ). Its presence suggests a potential upward shift in its prestige. For that to happen, favorable attitudes toward its use in writing are called for. Here we examine the linguistic attitudes of 222 toward , , and their corresponding verb forms in advertising. We find that (1) all speakers prefer ; (2) they favor the pronoun over its corresponding verb forms; (3) younger speakers prefer over their older counterparts; and (4) men prefer verb forms while women prefer forms. Given the overall positive attitudes toward , it is possible that its prestige will increase.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sic.18022.wey
2021-07-08
2021-09-26
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ades, Raphael
    1953 “My First Encounter with the Spanish of Medellín.” Hispania36: 325–327. 10.2307/335104
    https://doi.org/10.2307/335104 [Google Scholar]
  2. Agudelo Montoya, Claudia Liliana, Gladys Yolanda Pasuy Guerrero, Octavio Escobar Giraldo, and José Fernando Ramírez Osorio
    2016 “Actitudes lingüísticas de los profesores de lenguas de la Universidad de Caldas respecto al voseo.” Revista de Investigaciones UCM16 (27): 16–28. 10.22383/ri.v16i1.57
    https://doi.org/10.22383/ri.v16i1.57 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bursik, Bronislav
    2008 Las formas de tratamiento en la publicidad periodística de hoy de hace 25 años.” (Unpublished MA thesis). Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic. is.muni.cz/th/146604/ff_b/Las_formas_de_tratamiento.pdf
  4. Escribano, Asunción
    2006 “La cortesía lingüística como recurso publicitario.” Zer20: 271–297.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Ferrer, Eulalio
    1995El lenguaje de la publicidad. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Flórez, Luis
    1957Habla y cultura popular en Antioquia: Materiales para un estudio. Bogotá: Instituto Caro y Cuervo.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Gordon, Elizabeth
    1997 “Sex, Speech, and Stereotypes: Why Women Use Prestige Speech Forms More Than Men.” Language in Society26 (1): 47–63. 10.1017/S0047404500019400
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500019400 [Google Scholar]
  8. Jang, Ji Son
    2010 “Fórmulas de tratamiento pronominales en los jóvenes universitarios de Medellín (Colombia) desde la óptica socio-pragmática: Estrato socioeconómico y sexo.” Íkala15 (26): 43–116.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. 2012 “La dinámica de la alternancia entre tú, vos y usted en Medellín (Colombia) desde la teoría de la acomodación comunicativa.” Forma y Función25 (1): 129–144.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. 2013 “Voseo medellinense como expresión de identidad paisa.” Íkala18 (1): 61–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. 2015 “Frecuencia del tú en tres zonas del departamento de Antioquia (Colombia): influencia de la zona urbana/rural.” Forma y Función28 (1): 11–29. 10.15446/fyf.v28n1.51969
    https://doi.org/10.15446/fyf.v28n1.51969 [Google Scholar]
  12. Labov, William
    2001Principles of Linguistic Change. Social Factors. Malden: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Millán, Mónica
    2014 “Vos sos paisa: A Study of Address Forms in Medellín, Colombia.” InNew Directions in Hispanic Linguistics, ed. byRafael Orozco, 92–111. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Montes Giraldo, José Joaquín
    1967 “Sobre el voseo en Colombia.” Thesaurus22: 21–44.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Penny, Ralph
    2000 A History of the Spanish Language, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Quintanilla Aguilar, José Roberto Alexander, and Pablo Rodríguez Prieto
    2014 “El voseo en la publicidad de Costa Rica: Un análisis de las actitudes de los hablantes.” Revista Internacional de Lingüística Iberoamericana12 (1): 109–119.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Saville-Troike, Muriel
    1989The Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction. 2nd edition. Cambridge: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Urban Land Institute
    Urban Land Institute 2013 “City of the Year.” online.wsj.com/ad/cityoftheyear
  19. Vestergaard, Torben, and Kim Shroder
    1985The Language of Advertising. New York: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Villa Mejía, Víctor
    2010 “La solidaridad y poder del vos antioqueño.” Lingüística y Literatura58: 69–85.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Weyers, Joseph R.
    2011 “Tú and Usted in Mexican Advertising: The Politeness Systems of Written Public Discourse.” Southwest Journal of Linguistics30 (1): 117–133.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. 2016a “Making the Case for Increased Prestige of the Vernacular: Medellín’s Voseo.” InForms of Address in the Spanish-Speaking World, ed. byMaría Irene Moyna and Susana Rivera, 287–302. New York: John Benjamins. 10.1075/ihll.10.14wey
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.10.14wey [Google Scholar]
  23. 2016b “Medellín Cuenta Con Vos: The Changing Role of Voseo in Written communication.” Comunicación (Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín) 35: 67–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2018 “Beer, Hot Dogs, and Politics: The Vocative Function of Medellín’s Voseo.” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies95 (5): 475–489. 10.3828/bhs.2018.27
    https://doi.org/10.3828/bhs.2018.27 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sic.18022.wey
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sic.18022.wey
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: attitudes ; address ; vos
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error