Sociolinguistic variation of theoretical literary text as a twain’s linguistic and vernacular phenomenon
Author(s): Amer Ali Dahham Wateefi
Authors Affiliations:
Department of English, College of Humanities,
University of Babylon,
Hillah, Babylon, Iraq
DOIs:10.2017/IJRCS/202507014 | Paper ID: IJRCS202507014Sociolinguistic is a basis for the social, cultural, and ethnic structure, which is a tool to examine the language, therefore, any language may demonstrate on the sociolinguistic to understand the various disciplines such as regional, class and so on within the language itself. This research paper will use Mark Twain’s Humor as a theoretical linguistic study. Sociolinguists seek to describe the domain in the context of social aspects including the differentiation of society, culture, dialogue and gender. Therefore, sociolinguistic does not have any restriction to interact with another domain such as literature, by which sociolinguist uses is as a tool to scrutinize the language which we use it in the social context for comminuting as known as a ‘study of variation’, variation approaches to adapt in this subfield to offer access for the researcher to study a variation of linguistic: phonology (deal with the pronunciation), and Syntax (deal with the variables of dialect, although syntax is offering a good opportunity to the sociolinguistics to race the differ dialect in the same language). Sociolinguistics has existed to characterize social facts, Baker says that “Certain kinds of work combined insights from how the identity of person or social group relates to the way that they use language.” (Baker, 2010) It’s also crucial to concentrate on the context between language and society. We try to prove that speech and social behaviour are the intrinsic facts in sociolinguistics “According Trudge, certain kinds of work combine insights from sociology and linguistics. Examples of such work are attempts to deal with structure of discourse and conversation”. (Wardhaugh, 2010) “In reaction to the contention among many linguists working in a broadly Chomsky a framework that language can be dissociated from its social functions.” (Baker, 2010)
Amer Ali Dahham Wateefi (2025); Sociolinguistic variation of theoretical literary text as a twain’s linguistic and vernacular phenomenon, International Journal of Research Culture Society, ISSN(O): 2456-6683, Volume – 9, Issue – 7, Pp.81-88. Available on – https://ijrcs.org/
Baker, P. (2010). Sociolinguistics and Corpus Linguistics. Edenburgh: Edenburgh University PressLtd.
Barret, J. (2000). Dialect, Stereotype, and Humor. USA: bELL& hOELL INFORMATION AND LEARNING COMPANY.
Berkeley, H. N. (1957). Mark Twain of the Enterprise. University of California Press, 145.
Blair, W. (1960). Mark Twain &Hock Finn. USA: University of Califoria Press.
Booth, W. (1961). Rhetoric of Fiction. Chicago: University Chicago Press.
Brashear, M. M. (1934). Mark Twain Son of Missouri. USA: University of North Carolina Press,.
Brooks, V. M. (1920). Ordeal of the Mark Twain. New York: Summon & Schuster.
Bruce, R. (2000). Cliffs Notes on Twain’s the Adventure of the Hucleberry Finn. USA: Bruce Robert.
Charles, N. (1975). The Autobiography of Mark Twain. USA: Harper&Row.
Clemens, S. L. (1979). Adventure of Huckleberry Finn. New York: Norton & co.
CLINES, R. H. (1988). A DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF DIALOGUE AND INNER SPEECH. USA: UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND.
Duranti, A. (1997). Linguistic Anthropology. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Fitzgerald, F. S. (1993). The Great Gatsby. UK: Wsworth Editions Ltd.
G.Robinson, F. (1995). Mark Twain. USA: Cambridge University Press.
Hogeland, R. W. (1973). Women and Womanhood in America. USA: Lexington, Mass.
Hurst, M. J. (1990). The Voice of the Child in American Literature. USA: University press of Kentucky.
Hymes, D. (1972). Reinventing Anthrolopology. USA: Pantheon Books.
June, S. (1974). Herstory. USA: Alfred .
Kachru, B. B. (1990). The Alchemy of English. New York: Pergamon Press.
Kenneth, A. (1950). Nook Farm: Mark Twain’s Hartford. USA: Harvard University Press,.
Matthew M. Hurley, D. C. (2011). Use the Humor to Reverse-Engineer the Mind. England: MIT Press.
Maugham, W. S. (1930). Cakes and Ale. USA: Doubleday, Doran & Company.
Pascal Covka, J. (1960). Letters. USA: Southwest.
Petersen, S. (1960). Mark Twain and the Government. Idaho, USA: Caxton Printers.
R.Sewell, D. (1984). Darieties of Language in the Writing of Mark Twain. USA: University Microfilms International.
Raskin, V. (1988). international Journal of Humor research. USA: international Journal of Humor research.
Richard, C. (1957). The American Novel and Its Tradition. USA: Doubleday and Company.
ROARK, J. (2013). BENEATH MARK TWAIN: JUSTICE AND GENDER IN. Kansas City, Missouri: ProQuest LLC.
Stem, L. (1965). Tristram Sandy. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.
Stone, A. E. (1970). Innocent Eyes. New York: Archon Books.
Stone, A. E. (1970). The Innocent Eye:Childhood in Mark Twain’s imagination . USA: Archon Book.
THORESON, T. R. (1976). WOMEN IN THE WRITINGS OF MARK TWAIN. Illinois, USA: Xerox University Microfilms , Ann Arbor, Michigan .
Wardhaugh, R. (2010). An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. UK: BlackWell Publisher Ltd.
Wecter, D. (1947). The Love Letters of Mark Twain. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.
Wecter, D. (1949). Mark Twain to Mrs. Fairbanks. San Marino, USA: Huntington Library.
Wecter, D. (1961). Sam Clemens of Hannibal. usa: (Boston:.