LIN 260 – Variation in Speech Communities
Winter 2026, MW 12:10-1:30pm
Kerr Hall 273
Instructor: Rob Voigt
Office Hours M 4-5pm, W 1:30-2:30pm, Kerr Hall 281
Official Course Description: Linguistic variability in time, space, and society. Theoretical issues related to social and linguistic constraints in variation; issues and methods in the quantitative analysis of variation. Speech community, quantitative analytic methods, and the scope of sociolinguistic competence.
Schedule
| Week | Dates | Content | Materials |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 1/5 1/7 |
Intro, Background | Wednesday Eckert (2012). Three waves of variation study: The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. |
| 2 | 1/12 1/14 |
Social Class and Hierarchy | Monday Labov (1972). Social Stratification of (r) in New York Department Stores. Labov (1963). The Social Motivation of a Sound Change. (optional) Wednesday Snell (2018). Solidarity, stance, and class identities. |
| 3 | 1/21 | Region and “The Variable” | Wednesday Campbell-Kibler (2010). The sociolinguistic variant as a carrier of social meaning. Campbell-Kibler (2007). Accent, (ING), and the social logic of listener perceptions. (optional) |
Materials
All course materials are available in Canvas.
Structure
The course will consist primarily of readings of primary sources and discussion in class. Each class meeting will be centered around discussion of one core reading, with other additional/optional readings possible. As a general trend, papers on Mondays will be more “classic,” older, or theoretical; papers on Wednesdays will be more contemporary and/or empirical.
Before Class Responsibilities
Read the assigned paper and leave 3-5 comments in our shared notes document, at the latest by 9am on the morning of class. These can include: questions about issues or terms which are unfamiliar or confusing, critical responses and noticing gaps in argumentation, taking note of particularly insightful or thought-provoking tidbits, and broader questions for group discussion.
Discussion Roles
For each class period, we will assign the following discussion roles:
Discussion Leader. Review everyone’s comments before class and prepare (either just mentally or written in the document) a game plan to guide discussion.
Note Taker. During class, (lightly) add the most essential points raised in discussion to the shared document. This does not have to be exhaustive, but at least to help us remember the flow of the discussion to refer back to.
Final Project
This course will conclude with a final project, due on or before March 18th. I’m extremely open as to what this could be: a literature review, a longer response to a paper or set of papers, a research proposal, or even relevant empirical work with some corresponding explanation. We’ll discuss further in class, and in the second half of the quarter I’ll ask you to submit a (very short) final project proposal where you tell me what you’re planning to do. If you’re struggling to come up with something, email me or come to office hours to talk out some possibilities.
Evaluation
I practice “ungrading” in my courses. You know at least as well as I do how the course is going for you, so we’ll have two self-evaluations, at the middle and end of the class. In the first week I’ll ask you to explain your goals for the course; then for each self-evaluation I’ll ask you to reflect on your process and progress towards those goals, your participation in the course, and ultimately to give yourself a grade and explain your reasoning.
I hope to simply take your self-evaluation grades at face value, although if your self-evaluation disagrees significantly with my perception (in either direction) I may ask you to meet with me to hash out why our impressions differ.
If you’d like a better idea of exactly what this looks like, click here to see the text used in a different prior course in presenting the self-evaluation question regarding grades.
Considerations for Grading
Below I will ask you to evaluate your work on a traditional letter grade scale. As you see in the syllabus, this choice will weigh heavily in the grade I ultimately submit for you to the registrar.
I take this very seriously and hope you do as well.
My interpretation of an “A” is something like, “I put in a strong, consistent effort and worked hard to learn – I was engaged throughout, did all the work, and my performance was the best it could have been given my starting point and individual circumstances.”
My interpretation of a “B” is something like, “I gave it a solid go, but this class was not my priority this quarter and I could have done better. I did most of the work but sometimes did it cursorily, late, incompletely, or without feeling that I understood. My performance was fine given my starting point and individual circumstances but if I had invested more in this class I might have learned more.”
My interpretation of a “C” is something like, “I kind of barely made it through. I had trouble getting things done on time, or didn’t sufficiently reach out for help, or avoided the work for this class. I entirely skipped some readings or homework problems, but I managed to still get the idea of the material more or less. In sum, my performance didn’t quite meet my own expectations for myself.”
I ask you to interpret this holistically and be kind to yourself – you can still get an A if you had a few slip-ups here and there. But I also ask you to be honest with yourself about your performance.
Some questions to consider as you make this determination:
- Did you turn in your assignments on time? (Note: for me, turning in assignments late with a good reason is equivalent to turning them in on time.)
- Did you attend in-class lectures as much as you could? (Note: again, for me, missing class with a good reason is equivalent to attending.)
- Did you keep up with readings, videos, and in-class activites?
- Did you spend the allotted time in workshopping time on work for this class?
- Did your assignments run all the way through?
- Did you manage to pass all the tests for problems which had them?
- Did you reach out for help when you needed it? (Note: doing this is positive!!!)
- Did you collaborate with others to contribute to our classroom community (by helping on Ed, or outside of class)?
- Did you challenge yourself, or did you do the minimum?
As I’ve stated on the syllabus and will explain in class, if I disagree with your assessment (in either direction), I reserve the right to reach out to you for clarification or further discussion, and ultimately the right to make a different determination myself if we can’t work it out. I think the latter especially is relatively unlikely, and in that event I promise to provide you a substantial justification of my reasoning.
Policy on Generative AI
As a graduate seminar, I feel this is pretty straightforward. You must actually read the papers and do not attempt to for example, summarize them with AI instead. All other uses are covered under general academic integrity, such that you do not take credit for work that is not your own. If your workflow involves AI in any form, it must be appropriately attributed and explained.
Inclusion Statement
I am committed to creating an inclusive environment that actively values the diversity of backgrounds, identities, and experiences of everyone in the classroom. I welcome you to talk with me if you have any feedback or if there’s anything I can do to better support you. If you’d prefer to contact me anonymously you can do so using the form at the bottom of my faculty webpage.