262 Nancy Niedzielski
- Discussion
In Figure 11.6 I offer a model of how implicit and explicit knowledge interacts
with speaker identity for our linguistically secure speaker, based on an earlier
model of speaker identity ¿ rst proposed in Meyerhoff and Niedzielski (1994).
In our earlier model of speaker identity, we proposed that individuals’ identi-
ties could be cognized as a sphere that had two poles: one corresponding to
an ingroup, or “personal” identity, and one corresponding to an outgroup, or
“group” identity. We suggested that people “spin” this sphere towards one
pole or the other, based on the type of interaction they are engaged in. I add
to this model of speaker identity the notion of a ¿ lter, which allows varying
degrees of acoustic information to be acquired. As the model suggests, more
information is allowed near the group identity pole—that is, more acoustic
information about a speaker is acquired if the interaction is with an outgroup,
or less personal, interlocutor. This allows for the implicit information to be
acquired, even in immediate contexts. However, less information is allowed
in at the personal end, as in the case of the Detroiters, when they interact
with a speaker that they believe to be an ingroup member. Their routinized
language beliefs ¿ lter out more of the acoustic information, as a mechanism
to avoid the “disturbing knowledge” that Giddens speaks of—knowledge that
would threaten their own self-identity as a speaker of standard English.
Figure 11.6 A proposed model of speaker identity for a linguistically secure speaker
(based on Meyerhoff and Niedzielski 1994).