The “Homo-genius” Speech Community
Abstract
The uniformity of the code, “sensibly the same” for all members of a speech community, posited by the Course and still recalled from time to time, is but a delusive fiction; as a rule, everyone belongs simultaneously to several speech communities of different radius and capacity; any overall code is multiform and comprises a hierarchy of diverse sub codes freely chosen by the speaker with regard to the variable function of the message.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In situations where linguistic repertoires are largely discrepant and non-verbal signs do little to evoke solidarity, or where there is a surfeit of technologically mediated texts and imagery, identifying any initial common ground can itself be a substantial task.
“In situations where linguistic repertoires can be largely discrepant and non-verbal signs may do little to evoke solidarity, or alternatively in settings where there is a surfeit of technologically mediated texts and imagery, the identification of any initial common ground can itself be a substantial task (Barrett 1997: 188-191, Gee 1999: 15ff).”
From Language and Superdiversity (2015) · cites this paper as Barrett 1997
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2015) · Language and Superdiversity · doi:10.4324/9781315730240-8 · Cited by 885 · see citing works
- Authors
- Barrett, R.
- Corresponding author
- Barrett, Rusty
- ORCID
- Barrett, Rusty
- Venue
- Queerly Phrased
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressNew York, NY
- Published
- 1997-11-20
- Pages
- 181-201
- OpenAlex
- W4388116883
- Cited by
- 82
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 4 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 3.60
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Linguistic and Sociocultural Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistic research and analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Keywords
- speech communities, code-switching, multilingualism, language variation, subcodes, speaker choice
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
