Abstract
This study focuses on listener perceptions of African American English (AAE) on Twitter, examining both grammatical and ungrammatical usages, as well as how these perceptions may be affected by the race of the speaker and rater. We conducted an experimental survey designed to address the following questions: 1. Does avatar race affect perception of the grammaticality of AAE? 2. Are differences between grammatical and ungrammatical AAE discernible to naive raters of different races? 3. How are various social attributes evaluated for avatars of different races and different linguistic varieties? Results indicate that participants generally do not downgrade avatars who use grammatical AAE on ratings of grammaticality or personal characteristics. However, participants of all races disprefer ungrammatical uses of AAE, with black raters being especially sensitive to ungrammatical AAE. These findings have implications for sociolinguistics in that they demonstrate that participants across racial backgrounds may differentiate grammatical versus ungrammatical AAE online, and that contrary to expectations based on previous literature, AAE is not universally downgraded in these contexts. However, results also indicate that the use of AAE still negatively impacts listeners’ perceptions of speakers as educated, demonstrating that some widespread biases against AAE-speakers persist in an online context.
Appendix A: Stimuli tweets
Selected tweets for white UAAE avatar
Selected tweets for black GAAE avatar
Selected tweets for black MUSE avatar
Selected tweets for white GAAE avatar
Selected tweets for white MUSE avatar
Selected tweets for black UAAE avatar
Appendix B: Statistical summary
1a. Personality trait ratings regression model.
| Educated | Friendly | Funny | Rude | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Intercept) | 6.13 (0.27)*** | 4.84 (0.26)*** | 4.39 (0.29)*** | 1.52 (0.21)*** |
| Participant Race = Black | 0.55 (0.36) | −0.12 (0.35) | 0.86 (0.40)* | −0.32 (0.29) |
| Avatar grammar = GAAE | −0.40 (0.37) | 0.21 (0.36) | −0.57 (0.42) | −0.13 (0.30) |
| Avatar grammar = UAAE | −2.12 (0.37)*** | −1.66 (0.36)*** | −0.73 (0.42) | 0.57 (0.30) |
| Avatar Race = White | −1.61 (0.37)*** | −1.64 (0.36)*** | −1.41 (0.42)*** | 0.53 (0.30) |
| ParticipantRace = Black*Grammar = GAAE | 1.22 (0.51)* | −0.10 (0.50) | −0.14 (0.57) | −0.20 (0.42) |
| ParticipantRace = Black*Grammar = UAAE | −1.69 (0.51)** | −1.29 (0.50)* | −2.27 (0.57)*** | 0.02 (0.42) |
| ParticipantRace = Black*AvatarRace = White | −0.64 (0.51) | −1.15 (0.50)* | −1.48 (0.57)** | −0.05 (0.42) |
| Grammar = GAEE*AvatarRace = White | 0.46 (0.53) | 0.13 (0.52) | 0.41 (0.59) | −0.27 (0.43) |
| Grammar = UAEE*AvatarRace = White | 0.64 (0.53) | 0.99 (0.52) | 0.31 (0.59) | 0.08 (0.43) |
| ParticipantRace = Black* Grammar = GAEE*Avatar_Race = White | −0.44 (0.73) | 0.69 (0.71) | 1.10 (0.81) | 0.42 (0.59) |
| ParticipantRace = Black* Grammar = UAEE*Avatar_Race = White | 1.38 (0.73) | 1.66 (0.71)* | 2.04 (0.81)* | −0.03 (0.59) |
| R 2 | 0.26 | 0.20 | 0.12 | 0.05 |
| Adj. R 2 | 0.26 | 0.19 | 0.11 | 0.04 |
| Num. obs. | 1,152 | 1,152 | 1,152 | 1,152 |
| RMSE | 2.51 | 2.44 | 2.79 | 2.03 |
-
p < 0.001***, p < 0.01**, p < 0.05*.
1b. Personality trait model ANOVAs.
| Term | df | Educated | Friendly | Funny | Rude |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participant race | 1 | 2.5 | 28.1*** | 1.0 | 7.9** |
| Avatar variety | 2 | 129.7*** | 58.0*** | 22.7*** | 18.5*** |
| Avatar race | 1 | 91.6*** | 103.6*** | 72.7*** | 18.3*** |
| Participant race* Avatar variety | 2 | 15.2*** | 2.0 | 9.2*** | 0.0 |
| Participant race* Avatar race | 1 | 1.2 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 0.1 |
| Avatar Variety*Avatar race | 2 | 8.3*** | 15.1*** | 6.4*** | 0.1 |
| Participant race* Avatar Variety*Avatar race | 2 | 3.4* | 2.8* | 3.2* | 0.4 |
| Residuals | 1,140 |
-
p < 0.001***, p < 0.01**, p < 0.05*.
References
Abreu, Manuel Arturo. 2015. Online imagined Black English. London: Arachne. Available at: http://arachne.cc/issues/01/online-imagined_manuel-arturo-abreu.html.Search in Google Scholar
Baugh, John. 2015. Use and misuse of speech diagnostics for African American students. International Multidisciplinary Research Journal 9(4). 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2015.1082416.Search in Google Scholar
Bucholtz, Mary & Qiuana Lopez. 2011. Performing blackness, forming whiteness: Linguistic minstrelsy in Hollywood film. Journal of Sociolinguistics 15. 680–706. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2011.00513.x.Search in Google Scholar
Cutler, Cecilia A. 1999. Yorkville Crossing: White teens, hip hop and African American English. Journal of Sociolinguistics 3(4). 428–442. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9481.00089.Search in Google Scholar
D’Onofrio, Annette. 2019. Complicating categories: Personae mediate racialized expectations of non‐native speech. Journal of Sociolinguistics 23(4). 346–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12368.Search in Google Scholar
Eberhardt, Maeve & Kara Freeman. 2015. ‘First things first, I’m the realest’: Linguistic appropriation, white privilege, and the hip‐hop persona of Iggy Azalea. Journal of Sociolinguistics 19. 303–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12128.Search in Google Scholar
Fiske, Susan T., Amy J. C. Cuddy, Peter Glick & Jun Xu. 2002. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 82(6). 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878.Search in Google Scholar
Grieve, Jack, Andrea Nini & Diansheng Guo. 2018. Mapping lexical innovation on American social media. Journal of English Linguistics 46(4). 293–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424218793191.Search in Google Scholar
Hill, Jane. 2008. The everyday language of white racism. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781444304732Search in Google Scholar
Holliday, Nicole & Dan Villarreal. 2020. Intonational variation and incrementality in listener judgments of ethnicity. Laboratory Phonology 11(1). 1–21. https://doi.org/10.5334/labphon.229.Search in Google Scholar
Kang, Okim & Donald L. Rubin. 2009. Reverse linguistic stereotyping: Measuring the effect of listener expectations on speech evaluation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 28(4). 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927x09341950.Search in Google Scholar
Kay, Matthew, Cynthia Matuszek & Sean A. Munson. 2015. Unequal representation and gender stereotypes in image search results for occupations. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 3819–3828.10.1145/2702123.2702520Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Language in the inner city: Studies in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/.Search in Google Scholar
Rahman, Jacquelyn. 2008. Middle-class African Americans: reactions and attitudes toward African Americans English. American Speech 83(2). 141–176. https://doi.org/10.1215/00031283-2008-009.Search in Google Scholar
Rickford, J.R. 1999. African American vernacular English: Features, evolution, educational implications. New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar
Rickford, John R. & Sharese King. 2016. Language and linguistics on trial: Hearing Rachel Jeantel (and other vernacular speakers) in the courtroom and beyond. Language 92(4). 948–988. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2016.0078.Search in Google Scholar
Sidnell, Jack. 2002. Outline of AAVE Grammar. Available at: https://cdt.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Outline_of_AAVE_grammar___Jack_Sidnell_2002_1_Afr.pdf.Search in Google Scholar
Squires, Lauren. 2010. Enregistering internet language. Language in Society 39(4). 457–492. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404510000412.Search in Google Scholar
Van Hofwegen, Janneke & Walt Wolfram. 2010. Coming of age in African American English: A longitudinal study 1. Journal of Sociolinguistics 14(4). 427–455. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2010.00452.x.Search in Google Scholar
Wickham, Hadley. 2016. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed 5 April 2020).10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4Search in Google Scholar
Wiley, Terrence G. & Marguerite Lukes. 1996. English-only and standard English ideologies in the U.S. Tesol Quarterly 30(3). 511–535. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587696.Search in Google Scholar
Wolfram, Walt. 2004. The grammar of Urban African American Vernacular English. In Bernd Kortman & Edgar W. Schneider (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, vol. 2, 111–132. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
