This article started with the purpose of discussing the need for research considering the historical context in sociolinguistic research. To this end, in this paper, the term ‘historical socilinguistics’ was first proposed, and the emphasis was placed on presenting the rationale. (1) Interest in language and society existed widely before the term sociolinguistics was coined. In particular, there are cases where the term 'sociology of linguistics' was used before the emergence of the term 'socilinguistics' mentioned in Lee Ik-seop (1994), mixtures are also found. (2) It was discussed that the interest in the relationship between language and society is to study the history of the language community, and that interest in the 'language community' has a long history in itself despite the diversity of concepts. (3) In this paper, the ‘history related to the linguistic phenomenon of a language community’ and ‘social factors as a linguistic environment’ are to be explored as ‘historical sociolinguistics’. (4) The need to study the historical and social factors of language change was discussed not only in terms of phonological, vocabulary, and grammatical changes, but also in the process of creation and settlement of translated academic terms.

This paper examines the variation of the intervocalic /b, d, g/ in the Spanish spoken in one of the Andean Spanish varieties. One of the regional phonological features that characterize the Andean Spanish is the use of occlusive [b, d, g] in intervocalic positions where other standard varieties would favor approximate variants [ß, ð, ɣ]. This research provides the first quantitative study on the linguistic and extra-linguistic factors influencing the use of [b, d, g] in Andean Spanish. A total of 4,080 tokens from 24 speakers in the Tupe district were analyzed via multivariate statistical analysis with Goldvarb X. The results show that the most important extra-linguistic factors are speakers’ gender and age, with old female speakers producing significantly more occlusive [b, d, g] than other speakers. The results also indicate that the speakers are standardizing their use of /b, d, g/ but its process is quite different between the male and female speakers.

This paper analyzes the research progress of language attitudes in the field of sociolinguistics and proposes future research projects. First, the research progress of language attitudes can be categorized into four groups; attitudes to the language itself, attitudes to language variation, attitudes to language use, and attitudes to language identity. Research about attitudes to the language itself is peculiar in that big scale surveys were conducted by the government for linguistic policies. Quantitative survey method is preferable when providing the results in figures. However, it is unsuitable when analyzing the results in depth. Therefore, qualitative research entailed with various research methods is necessary. Research on attitudes toward language variation should be promoted considering the fast speed of linguistic change of the Korean language. So far most studies were about umlaut, euphony, grammatical change in stem and ending. Nevertheless, further studies should expand the research horizon to different linguistic units such as intonation, discourse markers, etc. Research on attitudes toward language use shows the possibility of extending the scope of the field of sociolinguistics. Especially study on anthroponym, commercials, brand names, copies, political slogans should not only be done on language attitudes but also on sociolinguistic respects. Lastly, research on language attitudes of minority groups focused on Korean migrants to Japan(Korean residents in Japan), former Soviet Union(Russian Koreans), and China(Korean-Chinese). However, at present Korea is a multicultural society which implicates that future studies should pay more attention on minority groups of different mother tongues for example immigrant workers, international students, temporary visitors, overseas Chinese, and foreigners who acquired Korean nationality, as well as North Korean defectors and migrant wives.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a critical overview of the discourse-analytic studies in Korean sociolinguistics, mainly analyzing articles published in The Sociolingustic Journal of Korea. To achieve this goal, this article discusses definitions of ‘discourse’ and ‘discourse analysis’, and approaches to discourse. The examination of the articles in the journal shows that major studies in Korean sociolinguistics can be summarized as in the following: (i) functional approaches to language and discourse markers, (ii) conversation analysis and interactional linguistics, (iv) media discourse and critical discourse analysis, (v) analysis of public speeches and advertisements, (vi) electronic discourse (internet and SNS discourse), among others. This overview shows that discourse-analytic studies in Korean linguistics have focused on certain specific topics such as discourse markers, conversation-analytic studies, critical discourse studies, and electronic discourse, differing in topics from sociolinguistic studies in American and other societies. This overview suggests that more sociolinguistic studies need to be carried out in the fields such as intercultural communication, electronic discourse, and gender-based discourse as further research topics in Korean sociolinguistics.

Noh, Hyung-nam. 2017. “Entertainment Science Based on Deep Learning: focused on Areal Sociolinguistics”. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 25(1). 27~52. The aim of this paper is to suggest a new scientific discipline in sociolinguistic research, dealing with entertainment science based on deep learning focused on areal sociolinguistics as a current methodology de facto made by ultra-fusion of area studies and sociolinguistics. From a fact-oriented and data-oriented analysis perspective this paper examines real phenomena of areal sociolinguistics provoked by two famous sing-a-song writers: America’s Robert Allen Zimmerman, so-called 2016 Nobel prize winner Bob Dylan, and Brazil’s Paulo Coelho de Souza. The results of the qualitative analyses between two eminent areas, where particular attributes of alternative societies are filled with swarm intelligence on the basis of resistance consciousness, suggest the areal sociolinguistics mentioned-above. From the diachronic and synchronic viewpoints of cross-over geographical cultures this paper makes a mid-range generalization, on making a definition about alternative societies in America and Brazil in spite of the geographical methodology of area studies between the two countries, being offered by stubborn resistance against ready-made ideas to calm down keen psychological conflicts among established moral principles to overcome philosophical catastrophe in social chaos, and full of competitive instinct against existing generations.

Kang, Hyeon-Seok. 2016. “Current Research Trends in Overseas Sociolinguistics: An Analysis Based on Recent Sociolinguistic Journal Articles and Conferences”. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 24(3). 1~35. This paper is an attempt to analyze the current trends in sociolinguistic research overseas, focusing on sociolinguistic studies in the US and Britain. Three main analyses are performed in this research, i.e., analyses of the Journal of Sociolinguistics articles published in 2010~2015 years, of the sociolinguistic conferences held in 2015, and of the sociolinguistic session titles of the LSA meetings held in 2010~2015 years. The results of the analyses suggest that anthropological linguistics, language variation, discourse analysis, and language contact still remain as the most influential subfields of sociolinguistics, while research fields of sociophonetics, social media studies, language landscape, and documentary linguistics have been establishing themselves as new research areas since 1990s.

Hong Min-pyo. 2016. “Research Trends of Japanese Sociolinguistics”. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 24(1). 311~336. This paper provides an overview of the background of emergence and current research trends of Japanese Sociolinguistics, based on the contents of ’Language Life’ that has been published since 1956 in “Japanese Linguistic”, the official journal of the Linguistic Society of Japan (currently the Society for Japanese Linguistics). It introduces the concept of Language Life, the role and research achievements of National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics in study of Japanese language life, the survey on the use of common language in Tsuruoka region, the formation process of common language in Japan, the problem in researches of Japanese language life, the emergence process of Japanese Sociolinguistics, and the special theme discussed in ”The Japanese Journal of Language in Society”, which is the official journal of Japanese Association of Sociolinguistic Sciences. Furthermore, it introduces the current trends and outcomes of the researches of Contrastive Sociolinguistics, Econolinguistics, Welfare Linguistics and Language Landscape. In particular, research trends and outcomes of Welfare Linguistics offer an interesting implication that outcomes of language studies should contribute to the happiness and welfare promotion of social members, as well as pursue new truth.

This study examined the factors of place name changes in China from the perspective of sociolinguistics. The place name change factors were diachronically review by not differentiating their corresponding period from ancient time to modern times. Generally, China’s place naming has two principles – physical geographical factors, and human geographical factors. In this study, the human geographical factors were mainly looked at by dividing them further into political diplomatic factors and sociocultural factors. First of all, as for political diplomatic factors, the country has been through name changes during Cultural Revolution, due to ethnic minority policies and due to foreign relationship, military activity and migration. Secondly, sociocultural factor were found to be place name changes to avoid taboo language, to seek sophisticated naming, caused by contact with different peoples and due to historic and cultural preservation.

On the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the founding of the Sociolinguistic Society of Korea (SSK), the paper presents a brief retrospective aspect of the developmental history of SSK and a comprehensive overview of the Labovian theory of language variation and change. He is the first sociolinguist who introduced the quantitative method to analyze the linguistic variation. His Master’s thesis Martha’s Vineyard Study (1963) and his doctoral dissertation The Social Stratification of New York English (1964) indeed gave rise to the rapid development of sociolinguistics in late 60s as a counterforce to the popular activities of the theoretical linguistics. Labov’s efforts for the education of the low-income children in Reading also deserve to be included just as great contributions as his linguistic achievements. The three volumes of his Principles of Linguistic Change which have just been completed this year together with The Atlas of North American English which includes vowel changes and chain shiftings of 332 northern American cities to establish the phonology of North American English more or less sum up his life-time achievements of 50 years in research and teaching.

This paper is a modest attempt to present a rather simplistic pedigree of sociolinguistics. It first describes the rise of sociolinguistics in the mid-1960s as an established academic discipline. The subsequent sections briefly survey the historial background of sociolinguistics in general, and the historical antecedents of the three main strands/orientations of modern sociolingujistics: the variation study, the ethnography of communication, and the sociology of language. The variation study, being primarily concerned with language variation and language change, finds its ancestry in the early studies in dialectology and historical linguistics. The ethnography of communication derives from anthropological linguistics and the language philosophy of 18th- and 19th-century German thinkers. The history of the sociology of language, which is rather short, stretches back to the earlier studies of language contact, bilingualism, and language policy.

The purpose of this paper is to look into theoretical features of the three leading sociolinguists, Dell Hymes, William Labov, and John Gumperz.On the basis of meta-theoretical terms, which help one to see the differences and similarities of given theoretical viewpoints, this study attempts to delineate main characteristics of the sociolinguistic approaches of the scholars.They are discussed by getting answers to questions such as how they see language or language use, how they perceive sociolinguistics as a discipline in relation to linguistics,to what extent they differ regarding their sociolinguistic approaches and where they can be positioned in the tradition of the philosophy of science as well as that of language study.Dell Hymes' approach, along with his view on the ethnography of speaking, is characterized as featuring sociolinguistic relativism. His major concern is to understand and describe socioculturally-bound ways ofspeaking or communication.In contrast, William Labov's approach,along with his study of sound change at social and regionallevel,is characterized as featuring sociolinguistic realism. This means that he is concerned with scientific description of language shifts as they happen as a whole in the context of actual language use. In addition,John Gumperz's approach is characterized as sociolinguistic interactionism. Unlike the previous two scholars, his sociolinguistic approach is uniquely microscopic in thathis main focus is placed on communicative interactions at the level of individual encounter, like interviewsorface-to-faceconversation.

Cho, Tae-rin. 2006. Positions on the Status and the Signification of Sociolinguistics. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 14(1). The purpose of this article is to examine the status and the signification of sociolinguistics by providing a comparative analysis of the various positions on this issue. Numerous positions have been distinguished too simply by denominations such as ‘OO sociolinguistics’ but have to be classified by criteria which show their essential difference (i.e., sphere of the object of study, relation with neighboring fields, autonomy as a field of science, epistemological viewpoint, consideration for the language user, viewpoint of the society, relation with real problems, etc.). After a brief examination of the logic, persuasiveness and limits of each position, this article clarifies its own position by offering a conceptual definition of sociolinguistics as a ‘study of the dynamic interaction between language, language user and social structure from a trans-disciplinary, hermeneutic and participatory point of view’. This discussion will contribute to elucidating the nature and the actual reality of sociolinguistics and exploring ideal ways toward its future development.

Cho, Tae-rin. 2006. Positions on the Status and the Signification of Sociolinguistics. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea 14(1). The purpose of this article is to examine the status and the signification of sociolinguistics by providing a comparative analysis of the various positions on this issue. Numerous positions have been distinguished too simply by denominations such as ‘OO sociolinguistics’ but have to be classified by criteria which show their essential difference (i.e., sphere of the object of study, relation with neighboring fields, autonomy as a field of science, epistemological viewpoint, consideration for the language user, viewpoint of the society, relation with real problems, etc.). After a brief examination of the logic, persuasiveness and limits of each position, this article clarifies its own position by offering a conceptual definition of sociolinguistics as a ‘study of the dynamic interaction between language, language user and social structure from a trans-disciplinary, hermeneutic and participatory point of view’. This discussion will contribute to elucidating the nature and the actual reality of sociolinguistics and exploring ideal ways toward its future development.

Kim, Hyesouk. 2004. Theories and Developments of Sociolinguistics. The Sociolinguistic Journal of Korea, 12(1). The purpose of this article is to understand a current status of sociolinguistics by reviewing previous studies and attempting to see the future of the discipline as linguistics. As Milroy and Milroy (1990:485) have defined, sociolinguistics is "the study of language as it is used by real speakers in social and situational contexts of use." It has four characteristics. (1)Those who study sociolinguistics are linguists but they have great interests in adding social variables to pure linguistics. Sociolinguists believe that criteria of correct language usage be based upon not only pure grammatical standards but also societal norms in terms of its relevance and general acceptance. (2)The goal of sociolinguistics is to identify a co-variance between language and society and to establish a theory of language performance. (3)Sociolinguistics regards synchronical and diachronical traits as an identical frame. (4)Sociolingustics pays attention to language usage in societal contexts and extends language competence, which is the main subject of pure linguistics, to communicative competence. D. Hymes predicts that the core areas of linguistics is actually sociolinguistics and, thus, the prefix 'socio' will not be necessary. Although we still have that prefix, it is true that sociolingusitics has already had its own identity and is growing rapidly as an independent discipline. In conclusion, this paper argues that sociolinguistics will receive more attention from linguists and play a key role in linguistics by explaining variation in language more systematically, and by interpreting and eliminating language conflict in everyday life.