Applying Linguistic Anthropology to Language Use and Meaning in The Joy Luck Club
Author: MARTIN MUNYAO MUINDE
Email: Ephantusmartin@gmail.com
Introduction
Amy Tan’s The Joy Luck Club (1989) provides a rich textual landscape for applying linguistic anthropology to understand how language shapes social relationships, cultural identity, and meaning-making across generations and cultures. Linguistic anthropology, as a subfield of anthropology, examines the relationships between language, culture, and society, focusing on how linguistic practices construct social reality and reflect cultural values (Duranti, 1997). The novel’s portrayal of Chinese immigrant mothers and their American-born daughters offers unique insights into code-switching, language socialization, pragmatic meaning, linguistic ideology, and the power dynamics embedded in multilingual communication. Through careful analysis of dialogue, narrative voice, and metalinguistic commentary, this paper demonstrates how Tan’s work illustrates fundamental concepts in linguistic anthropology, including the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, speech communities, language and identity, and the role of context in meaning construction.
Linguistic anthropology investigates language not merely as a system of grammar and vocabulary but as a form of social action that creates and maintains cultural worlds (Ahearn, 2012). In The Joy Luck Club, language operates on multiple levels simultaneously: as a marker of ethnic and generational identity, as a site of cultural conflict and negotiation, as a vehicle for transmitting values and worldviews, and as a source of misunderstanding and alienation. The mothers speak what is often termed “broken English,” a pidginized form that reflects their incomplete acquisition of English as adult learners, while their daughters are native English speakers who possess only limited proficiency in Chinese. This linguistic asymmetry creates complex communication dynamics that structure family relationships and shape individual identity formation. By applying linguistic anthropological frameworks to the novel’s representation of language use, this paper illuminates how Tan captures the lived experience of bilingualism, the politics of language prestige, and the ways linguistic practices both reflect and constitute cultural difference in immigrant communities.
Language Ideologies and Linguistic Prejudice
Linguistic anthropology emphasizes that attitudes toward language varieties are never neutral but rather reflect broader social hierarchies and power relations, a concept known as language ideology (Woolard, 1998). The Joy Luck Club vividly illustrates how language ideologies operate in American society, where standard English carries prestige and authority while accented or non-standard varieties are stigmatized as markers of foreignness and inferior social status. The mothers’ accented English subjects them to discrimination and dismissal in their interactions with mainstream American institutions, despite the fact that their language is perfectly adequate for communication. June Woo reflects on her mother’s English, initially describing it as “broken” or “fractured” English, revealing her internalization of dominant language ideologies that equate non-standard language with deficiency (Tan, 1989, p. 23). However, June later recognizes that her mother’s English is “perfectly clear, perfectly natural,” challenging the notion that linguistic difference equals linguistic inadequacy and revealing how language ideologies shape perception rather than reflecting objective linguistic reality.
The novel also explores how linguistic prejudice affects the mothers’ social positioning and access to resources in American society. When interacting with doctors, landlords, store clerks, and other institutional representatives, the mothers frequently encounter people who refuse to take them seriously or who deliberately misunderstand them because of their accented speech. June recounts instances where her mother would have her make phone calls or conduct business on her behalf because native English speakers would respond more positively to June’s unaccented speech, even when conveying identical information. This phenomenon illustrates what linguistic anthropologists call “linguistic capital,” the idea that certain language varieties provide access to social and economic resources while others limit such access (Bourdieu, 1991). The mothers’ limited English proficiency, despite their intelligence, education, and life experience, places them at a structural disadvantage in American society, forcing them to rely on their bilingual children as linguistic intermediaries. This dependence creates complex power dynamics within immigrant families, where children possess linguistic capital that their parents lack, potentially inverting traditional hierarchies of authority and knowledge.
Code-Switching and Linguistic Identity Performance
Code-switching, the alternation between two or more languages or language varieties within a single conversation or utterance, represents a crucial linguistic practice in bilingual communities and serves multiple social functions (Gumperz, 1982). Throughout The Joy Luck Club, characters engage in code-switching between English and Chinese, and this linguistic behavior carries significant social meaning beyond simple lexical substitution. The mothers switch to Chinese when discussing private matters, expressing emotions that English cannot adequately capture, or asserting their Chinese identity and authority. For example, when the mothers gather for the Joy Luck Club meetings, their conversations incorporate Chinese words, phrases, and entire stretches of discourse, creating a linguistic space that excludes English-only speakers and affirms their shared cultural background. This code-switching serves what linguistic anthropologists call an “identity function,” allowing speakers to claim membership in particular social groups and to position themselves within complex identity landscapes (Myers-Scotton, 1993).
The daughters’ limited ability to participate in Chinese language interactions creates generational and cultural distance within families, illustrating how language proficiency directly affects social relationships and belonging. While the daughters understand some Chinese, they typically cannot speak it fluently, forcing conversations with their mothers to occur primarily in English. This linguistic imbalance means the mothers must constantly operate in their second language when communicating with their daughters, potentially limiting their ability to express complex thoughts and emotions. The daughters’ English dominance also positions them as more “American” and their mothers as more “foreign,” reinforcing cultural hierarchies that privilege American identity over Chinese identity. However, the novel shows instances where daughters use Chinese words or phrases strategically, attempting to bridge cultural gaps or demonstrate respect for their heritage. These moments of code-switching, even when linguistically imperfect, carry significant social meaning, signaling the daughters’ recognition of their bicultural identity and their efforts to maintain connection with their Chinese heritage despite their linguistic limitations.
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis and Linguistic Relativity
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, also known as linguistic relativity, proposes that the language one speaks influences how one thinks and perceives the world (Whorf, 1956). While strong versions of this hypothesis claiming language determines thought have been largely rejected, weaker versions suggesting language influences cognitive patterns remain influential in linguistic anthropology (Lucy, 1992). The Joy Luck Club provides numerous examples where Chinese and English appear to encode different cultural concepts and worldviews, creating challenges for translation and mutual understanding. The mothers frequently reference Chinese concepts that lack direct English equivalents, such as “yuan” (fate or predestined relationship), “li” (proper behavior according to social position), and various terms for family relationships that specify generational and maternal/paternal distinctions unmarked in English. These untranslatable concepts suggest that Chinese and English may structure social reality differently, making certain cultural ideas more salient or easier to express in one language than another.
The difficulties characters experience in translating between Chinese and English extend beyond vocabulary to encompass different pragmatic norms and communicative styles associated with each language. Chinese communication, as represented in the novel, relies heavily on indirection, context, and implication, while American English communication emphasizes directness and explicit statement. When the mothers attempt to convey advice, criticism, or affection through indirect Chinese communicative patterns, their daughters often miss the intended meaning, interpreting ambiguous utterances according to American pragmatic norms that assume speakers say what they mean directly. This cultural-linguistic mismatch creates persistent miscommunication despite shared vocabulary, illustrating that successful communication requires not just linguistic competence (knowledge of grammar and lexicon) but also pragmatic competence (knowledge of how language is appropriately used in social context) (Hymes, 1972). The novel thus demonstrates that languages are not simply different codes for expressing the same universal meanings but rather are embedded in distinct cultural frameworks that shape both what is said and how it is interpreted.
Language Socialization and Cultural Transmission
Linguistic anthropology examines language socialization, the process through which individuals acquire linguistic competence and cultural knowledge simultaneously, as children learn not only how to speak but also how to be appropriate members of their cultural community (Ochs & Schieffelin, 2011). The Joy Luck Club portrays language socialization as particularly challenging in immigrant families where parents and children are socialized into different linguistic and cultural systems. The mothers were socialized in China, where they learned Chinese language, Chinese communicative norms, and Chinese cultural values as an integrated package. They attempt to socialize their daughters into similar patterns, teaching them Chinese words, stories, and values, but this socialization occurs within an American context where daughters are simultaneously being socialized into English language and American culture through schools, peers, and media.
This dual socialization creates what linguistic anthropologists recognize as competing language socialization trajectories, where children receive contradictory messages about appropriate language use and cultural behavior from different socialization agents (Garrett & Baquedano-López, 2002). The mothers socialize their daughters to respect elders, prioritize family over individual desires, and communicate indirectly to maintain social harmony—values encoded in Chinese language practices. However, American schools and peers socialize the daughters to assert individual rights, speak their minds directly, and question authority. These competing socialization pressures create internal conflicts for the daughters, who must navigate between contradictory cultural scripts without clear guidance about how to integrate them. The novel shows how language becomes a primary site where these cultural conflicts manifest, as daughters struggle to understand their mothers’ indirect communicative style while simultaneously resisting what they perceive as excessive criticism or unreasonable expectations. The incomplete language socialization across generations—with daughters never fully learning Chinese communicative competence and mothers never fully learning American pragmatic norms—contributes to persistent family tensions and mutual incomprehension.
Narrative Voice and Linguistic Authority
Linguistic anthropology attends to questions of linguistic authority and voice, examining who has the right to speak, whose speech is valued, and how narrative forms structure the presentation of experience (Bakhtin, 1981). The Joy Luck Club employs multiple narrative voices, alternating between mothers’ and daughters’ perspectives, and each narrator’s linguistic style reflects their cultural positioning and social identity. The mothers’ sections, even though written in English for readers’ accessibility, incorporate Chinese linguistic structures, vocabulary, and rhetorical patterns that mark them as translations of Chinese thought processes. Their narratives use parataxis (coordinate clause structures) rather than hypotaxis (subordinate clause structures), reflecting Chinese syntactic preferences. They employ metaphors, proverbs, and references drawn from Chinese cultural contexts, requiring readers to engage with Chinese meaning-making systems even while reading English text.
The daughters’ narrative sections, by contrast, employ standard American English with idiomatic expressions, cultural references, and rhetorical structures typical of American writing. Their linguistic authority in English contrasts sharply with their mothers’ linguistic marginality, yet the novel’s structure gives equal narrative weight to both generations’ voices. By allowing mothers and daughters to narrate their own stories in their own linguistic styles, Tan challenges hierarchies that privilege native English speakers’ perspectives and demonstrates that linguistic marginality does not equal limited insight or reduced human complexity. The mothers, despite their “broken English” in dialogue, possess sophisticated narrative voices in their interior monologues, revealing the gap between their actual cognitive and communicative capacities and how they are perceived by English-speaking audiences. This narrative structure illustrates what linguistic anthropologists emphasize: that linguistic competence is context-dependent and judgments about language proficiency often reflect social prejudice rather than objective assessment of communicative ability.
Metaphor and Cultural Models
Linguistic anthropology investigates how metaphor structures understanding and how cultural models—shared frameworks for interpreting experience—are encoded in linguistic practices (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980). The Joy Luck Club demonstrates how Chinese and American cultures employ different metaphorical systems and cultural models, creating challenges for cross-cultural understanding. The mothers frequently use metaphors drawn from Chinese cultural contexts: references to Chinese mythology, historical figures, proverbs, and moral tales that carry rich associations for Chinese speakers but require extensive explanation for American audiences. For example, Chinese concepts of balance, harmony, and the relationships between opposing forces (yin and yang) structure how the mothers understand personality, relationships, and life challenges. These metaphorical frameworks do not translate easily into American cultural models that emphasize individual agency, linear progress, and explicit causation.
The cultural model differences extend to fundamental concepts like family, self, and obligation. Chinese cultural models, as represented by the mothers, conceptualize the self as inherently relational, defined through connections to family and community rather than as an autonomous individual (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). This relational self is encoded in Chinese kinship terminology, which makes fine distinctions between relatives based on generation, gender, and maternal/paternal lineage—distinctions that have social significance in determining obligations and appropriate behavior. English kinship terminology, by contrast, makes fewer distinctions, treating “aunt” or “cousin” as generic categories without specifying the relationship details that Chinese terms encode. The daughters, socialized into American cultural models that privilege individual autonomy and personal choice, struggle to understand their mothers’ relational worldview, where individual desires are subordinate to family harmony and obligations. These competing cultural models, embedded in different linguistic practices, structure how mothers and daughters interpret conflicts, assign blame, and imagine possible solutions to family tensions.
Politeness, Face, and Pragmatic Meaning
Politeness theory in linguistic anthropology examines how speakers manage social relationships and navigate potential face-threats through linguistic choices (Brown & Levinson, 1987). The concept of “face”—one’s public self-image and claim to social respect—is culturally variable, and strategies for maintaining face differ across cultures. Chinese culture, as portrayed in The Joy Luck Club, places tremendous importance on face (mianzi), and much communicative behavior aims to preserve both one’s own face and others’ face in social interactions. The mothers employ indirect communication strategies that allow for face-saving, avoiding direct confrontation, explicit criticism, or unambiguous refusal that would threaten relationship harmony. They convey criticism through stories, comparisons, and implications rather than direct statements, expecting listeners to infer intended meanings from context.
The daughters, socialized into American communicative norms that value directness and explicit statement, often misinterpret their mothers’ indirect politeness strategies as passive-aggressive behavior or unclear communication. What the mothers intend as face-saving indirection, the daughters experience as confusion, frustration, or deliberate obfuscation. For example, when mothers offer advice through stories about other people rather than direct commands, daughters may miss the intended parallel to their own situations, interpreting the stories as irrelevant tangents rather than pointed guidance. This pragmatic mismatch illustrates what linguistic anthropologists emphasize: that meaning resides not just in words themselves but in the cultural frameworks for interpreting those words (Duranti, 1997). The same utterance can carry vastly different meanings depending on whether one applies Chinese or American pragmatic norms, and the mothers and daughters consistently apply different interpretive frameworks to each other’s speech, resulting in systematic miscommunication despite shared vocabulary.
Language and Gender in Chinese American Families
Linguistic anthropology examines how language and gender intersect, recognizing that gender is performed through linguistic practices and that language ideologies often encode gender hierarchies (Bucholtz & Hall, 2004). The Joy Luck Club focuses specifically on female experiences, and the novel reveals how gendered language practices differ between Chinese and American contexts. The mothers’ generation experienced Chinese patriarchal culture where women’s speech was constrained and devalued, where women were expected to be silent in mixed-gender contexts and to express themselves only indirectly. Their migration to America offered possibilities for greater communicative freedom, yet they discovered that American culture also contains gender-based linguistic constraints, though structured differently than Chinese gender norms.
The mothers attempt to teach their daughters gender-specific communicative strategies that combine elements of Chinese and American femininity, hoping to equip them with linguistic tools for navigating patriarchal systems in both cultures. However, the linguistic lessons they offer often seem outdated or oppressive to daughters raised in American contexts where women’s linguistic agency has expanded significantly from previous generations. For instance, mothers encourage daughters to speak softly, avoid direct disagreement, and use linguistic indirection to influence men—strategies that worked in Chinese cultural contexts but may be less effective or desirable in American settings where assertiveness is increasingly valued in women’s speech. The generational conflict over appropriate female language use reflects broader cultural shifts in gender relations and demonstrates how linguistic practices are sites where cultural change and intergenerational tension become visible. The novel also shows how mother-daughter communication employs different linguistic registers than mixed-gender communication, with women speaking more openly and directly to each other than they do in interactions with men, illustrating the contextual variability of linguistic practice.
Bilingualism and Cognitive Implications
Linguistic anthropology increasingly engages with research on bilingualism, examining how multilingualism affects cognition, identity, and social interaction (Romaine, 1995). The Joy Luck Club portrays various forms of bilingualism across generations: the mothers are late-stage bilinguals who learned English as adults and maintain Chinese as their dominant language for internal thought and emotional expression; the daughters are early bilinguals exposed to both languages in childhood but with English dominance and limited Chinese proficiency. These different bilingual profiles create asymmetric communication patterns within families, where each generation possesses linguistic competencies the other lacks. The mothers can think in Chinese and translate into English, giving them access to Chinese cultural concepts and rhetorical strategies, while daughters think primarily in English and lack access to the full range of meanings available in Chinese.
The novel suggests that language choice affects not just what can be said but how speakers position themselves emotionally and culturally. The mothers describe experiencing different emotions and personality traits when speaking Chinese versus English, a phenomenon linguistic research on bilingualism documents as common among multilingual speakers (Pavlenko, 2005). Chinese represents intimacy, emotional depth, and authentic self-expression for the mothers, while English represents public performance and communicative necessity. June reflects that her mother uses Chinese words when “all [her] mother’s thoughts were a muddle, and she couldn’t organize her thoughts into English” (Tan, 1989, p. 23), suggesting that language switching correlates with cognitive processing differences. This observation aligns with linguistic anthropological research showing that bilinguals may access different memories, emotional associations, and cognitive frameworks depending on which language they are using, challenging notions of language as merely a neutral code for expressing universal thoughts.
Language Revitalization and Heritage Language Learning
Linguistic anthropology examines language maintenance and revitalization efforts in communities where ancestral languages are threatened by language shift toward dominant languages (Fishman, 1991). The Joy Luck Club portrays a common pattern in immigrant communities where the first generation speaks the heritage language but subsequent generations shift toward the dominant language of the host society, potentially resulting in language loss across generations. The mothers attempt to teach their daughters Chinese, but these efforts largely fail as English becomes the daughters’ dominant and preferred language. This language shift creates cultural discontinuity, as daughters cannot access Chinese-language texts, media, or conversations that transmit cultural knowledge.
However, the novel also depicts growing awareness among the daughters that Chinese language loss represents not just linguistic change but cultural loss, as they recognize that their inability to speak Chinese limits their connection to their heritage and their relationships with their mothers. By the novel’s conclusion, several daughters express interest in learning more Chinese or teaching it to their own children, suggesting the possibility of heritage language revitalization in the third generation. This pattern reflects what linguistic anthropologists document as common in immigrant communities: second generations often experience the strongest language shift and cultural assimilation, while third generations sometimes attempt to recover lost linguistic and cultural knowledge (Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). June’s journey to China and her desire to understand her Chinese name’s meaning represent an initial step toward language and cultural revitalization, as she seeks to recover linguistic knowledge her mother tried but failed to transmit during her childhood. The novel thus illustrates both the vulnerability of heritage languages in immigrant contexts and the potential for renewed interest in language learning as part of identity reclamation.
Metalinguistic Commentary and Language Awareness
Linguistic anthropology attends to metalinguistic discourse—talk about talk—examining how speakers reflect on and evaluate language use (Silverstein, 1976). The Joy Luck Club contains extensive metalinguistic commentary where characters discuss language itself, reflecting on the adequacy of translation, the challenges of communication across languages, and the social meanings attached to different language varieties. June’s famous passage about her mother’s English serves as metalinguistic commentary that challenges dominant language ideologies: “I think my mother’s English almost had an effect on limiting my possibilities in life as well… But to me, my mother’s English is perfectly clear, perfectly natural. It’s my mother tongue. Her language, as I hear it, is vivid, direct, full of observation and imagery” (Tan, 1989, p. 23). This metalinguistic reflection invites readers to reconsider their own language ideologies and to recognize that judgments about language quality reflect social prejudice rather than objective linguistic properties.
Throughout the novel, characters engage in metalinguistic reflection that reveals their awareness of how language shapes their experiences and relationships. They comment on the difficulty of translation, the inadequacy of English words for Chinese concepts, the social meanings of accented speech, and the power dynamics embedded in language choice. This metalinguistic awareness itself represents a form of linguistic expertise, as bilingual speakers develop sophisticated understandings of how languages work and how they differ. The mothers, despite their limited English proficiency, possess expert knowledge about Chinese language structure, pragmatics, and poetics that their English-dominant daughters lack. Similarly, the daughters possess sophisticated metalinguistic awareness about how their mothers’ accented English is perceived by other Americans and how to navigate between different linguistic registers in different social contexts. This metalinguistic knowledge represents a valuable form of cultural and linguistic capital specific to bilingual communities, though it often goes unrecognized in assessments that focus narrowly on standard language proficiency.
Conclusion
Applying linguistic anthropology to The Joy Luck Club reveals how Amy Tan’s novel provides sophisticated insights into the relationships between language, culture, and social identity in immigrant communities. Through examination of language ideologies, code-switching, linguistic relativity, language socialization, narrative voice, metaphor, pragmatics, gender, bilingualism, heritage language maintenance, and metalinguistic awareness, this analysis demonstrates that language operates not merely as a tool for communication but as a constitutive force that shapes social relationships, cultural transmission, and individual identity. The novel illustrates fundamental concepts in linguistic anthropology while making these theoretical constructs accessible through vivid characterization and compelling storytelling.
The Joy Luck Club demonstrates that multilingualism in immigrant families creates both challenges and opportunities. The linguistic asymmetries between mothers and daughters—with mothers dominant in Chinese but limited in English, and daughters dominant in English but limited in Chinese—structure family relationships and contribute to misunderstanding and conflict. However, these linguistic differences also create possibilities for cultural brokering, identity negotiation, and the development of hybrid communicative practices that draw from both Chinese and American linguistic resources. The novel reveals that successful communication across cultural and linguistic boundaries requires not just bilingual proficiency but bicultural competence—the ability to understand and navigate the different pragmatic norms, cultural assumptions, and social contexts that give language its meaning.
From a linguistic anthropological perspective, The Joy Luck Club illustrates how language is never neutral but always embedded in power relations, cultural values, and social hierarchies. The stigmatization of the mothers’ accented English reflects broader patterns of linguistic discrimination that marginalize non-native speakers regardless of their actual communicative competence. The daughters’ inability to speak Chinese, while marking them as more “American” and potentially providing advantages in mainstream society, also disconnects them from their cultural heritage and limits their relationships with their mothers. These linguistic patterns demonstrate how language is implicated in both oppression and resistance, both cultural loss and cultural preservation.
Ultimately, The Joy Luck Club makes visible what linguistic anthropology emphasizes: that language is fundamentally a social phenomenon that creates and maintains cultural worlds. The mothers’ and daughters’ struggles to communicate across linguistic and cultural boundaries reflect broader challenges facing multilingual, multicultural societies in an era of increasing globalization and migration. By centering language use and meaning-making in her portrayal of Chinese American families, Tan demonstrates how linguistic practices both reflect and constitute cultural identity, how languages encode different worldviews and values, and how successful cross-cultural communication requires understanding the cultural contexts that give language its meaning. The novel thus serves as both a literary achievement and a valuable text for linguistic anthropological analysis, offering insights into the complex relationships between language, culture, and identity that continue to shape immigrant experiences and intercultural communication in contemporary society.
References
Ahearn, L. M. (2012). Living language: An introduction to linguistic anthropology. Wiley-Blackwell.
Bakhtin, M. M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays. University of Texas Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2004). Theorizing identity in language and sexuality research. Language in Society, 33(4), 469-515.
Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic anthropology. Cambridge University Press.
Fishman, J. A. (1991). Reversing language shift: Theoretical and empirical foundations of assistance to threatened languages. Multilingual Matters.
Garrett, P. B., & Baquedano-López, P. (2002). Language socialization: Reproduction and continuity, transformation and change. Annual Review of Anthropology, 31, 339-361.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge University Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: Selected readings (pp. 269-293). Penguin.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.
Lucy, J. A. (1992). Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge University Press.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224-253.
Myers-Scotton, C. (1993). Social motivations for codeswitching: Evidence from Africa. Oxford University Press.
Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B. B. (2011). The theory of language socialization. In A. Duranti, E. Ochs, & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), The handbook of language socialization (pp. 1-21). Wiley-Blackwell.
Pavlenko, A. (2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge University Press.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. G. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second generation. University of California Press.
Romaine, S. (1995). Bilingualism (2nd ed.). Blackwell.
Silverstein, M. (1976). Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. In K. H. Basso & H. A. Selby (Eds.), Meaning in anthropology (pp. 11-55). University of New Mexico Press.
Tan, A. (1989). The Joy Luck Club. G.P. Putnam’s Sons.
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. MIT Press.
Woolard, K. A. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of inquiry. In B. B. Schieffelin, K. A. Woolard, & P. V. Kroskrity (Eds.), Language ideologies: Practice and theory (pp. 3-47). Oxford University Press.