Preferences for (in)formal language: correlations with attitudes toward linguistic variation, multilingualism, tolerance of ambiguity, and residence abroad

ABSTRACT

Drawing on data collected via a web-based survey, the study investigates the relationship between preferences for (in)formal language and attitudes toward linguistic variation among a large group of monolingual and multilingual adults (n = 379). Also explored are the links between preferences for (in)formal language and several secondary variables: tolerance of ambiguity, degree of multilingualism, age, experience living abroad, and educational achievement. Participants with more favourable attitudes toward linguistic practices that diverge from standard usage, who were more tolerant of ambiguity, and who had spent at least some time living or working in a foreign country tended to have more informal linguistic preferences. Formality preferences did not, however, appear to be related to knowledge of multiple languages, age, or education. Extending the findings reported in a previous study [van Compernolle, R. A. (2016). Are multilingualism, tolerance of ambiguity, and attitudes toward linguistic variation related? International Journal of Multilingualism, 13, 61–73], the discussion centres on a multidirectional relationship between the variables of interest, including the mutual influence of language attitudes and formality preferences. Future directions are proposed in the conclusion.

KEYWORDS:

• Language formality
• language attitudes
• linguistic variation
• tolerance of ambiguity
• multilingualism
• residence abroad

Acknowledgements

Many thanks are due to Jean-Marc Dewaele for his invaluable input during the design of this study and to two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. Studies have linked TA to several variables relevant to multilingualism and L2 development, such as perception of foreign accents (Seravalle, 2011), ability to imitate new phonemes (Reiterer, Singh, & Winkler, 2012), success in foreign language learning (Chapelle & Roberts, 1986; Rubin, 2008), L2 learning strategies (Oxford & Ehrman, 1992), and L2 listening and pronunciation (Baran-Lucarz, 2012; Ely, 1995).

2. Calculated as the typical threshold p value for statistical significance (i.e. p < .05) divided by the number of correlations calculated. Thus, .05/4 correlations = 0.0125.