Abstract
Early sociolinguistics was determinedly multidisciplinary and Labov's work was eagerly read by anthropologists. Nevertheless, the ethnographic and interpretivist commitments of anthropology contrasted with Labov's correlational method and positivist philosophical assumptions. This paper discusses three debates between those two broad methodological/philosophical traditions and traces their outcomes: on the nature of linguistic heterogeneity; the (re)production of social inequality; and the significance of linguistic style. I argue that the debates were productive. Although anthropologists often forcefully critiqued Labov's methods and conceptual proposals, dialogue with Labov's research has had positive effects: current work bears the marks of these engagements.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
