531-536 Sociological Aspects of Slang 531 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 01, Issue 09, 2023 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 Sociological Aspects of Slang Norova Mavluda Fayzulloyevna Associate Professor, Doctor of Philosophy in Philology of the Department of English Language at Bukhara State Medical Institute named after Abu Ali ibn Sino Abstract The article explores the sociological implications of slang as a form of communication that reflects cultural shifts, social dynamics and group identity. It delves into the ways in which slang fosters inclusivity, constructs boundaries and establishes a sense of belonging within various social communities. Furthermore, the article emphasizes the role of slang in reflecting social attitudes, power dynamics and in-group dynamics. It underscores the importance of examining slang as a lens through which to understand and analyze social interactions, identity formation and the complexities of cultural expression within diverse societal contexts. Keywords: musicality, informality, group-restriction, secrecy, reduplicatives, debasement, aggressiveness, humour, privacy. Slang is associated with many sociological properties, which derive from both its varied nature and its multifunctionality. The properties are reported here below and arranged in descending order of frequency: that is, the first property (group-restriction) is the most frequent among slang definitions, whereas the thirty-first (spontaneity) is reported only in one study of all those that we have explored. Given the miscellaneous nature of such properties, and their often contradictory nature (cf. debasement and prestige), slang is not claimed to exhibit all of them simultaneously. However, it should exhibit at least some of the following: Ø Group-restriction: in its specific sense, slang is frequently described as an in-group vocabulary that identifies people of a common age and experience, and facilitates their group solidarity. London teenagers, for example, may be identified by their use of such slang words as man, mate and wicked (COLT), while drug addicts use such words as coke, joint, and smack to create cohesiveness within their group. Ø Informality: slang (esp. general slang) is commonly viewed as a colloquial level of speech that signals the speaker’s desire to soften the seriousness or formality of the dominant tone, and to assume instead a more familiar or conversational tone. Instances of slang informality are the noun bread (orig. U.S.), used in familiar contexts to mean ‘money’, and the verb phrases go big (orig. U.S.) and go it, which are the informal counterparts of ‘be a big success, have a large sale’ and ‘go along at great speed’. Ø Time-restriction: slang is temporary since it changes over time. It is typical of some generation but falls into disuse very quickly, with the taking over of the next generation and the change of trends and tastes. Thus, some slang words may have a very similar meaning, but a different temporal collocation, as shown by the near-synonymic exclamations for ‘excellent’: wizard, groovy, magic, fab (^ fabulous), brill (^ brilliant), sick [13, 98]. 532 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Ø Ephemerality: slang is an ephemeral, short-lived, everchanging vocabulary. Novel words and special meanings crop up at very brief intervals, but generally remain in current use for a short time, and then pass away as quickly as they have been created. Thus, while some words, such as chap, chum and grub “have been slang for a long time”, other words (called “vogue words” in the literature), such as massive, paranoid and reckon, “have become fashionable for a short period of time”. And still other words, such as bus, phone and pub are no longer felt as slang, but rather as colloquial language. Ø Debasement: like many other non-standard varieties, slang is considered debased, subordinate speech, characteristically dominated by reversed prestige, lack of dignity and anti-social features. At least, slang is viewed so by the conformists, who condemn many common slang words (e.g. bloke, dude, guv) because they lower the level of discourse to degraded language. Ø Freshness: slang is often described as a fresh vital vocabulary that keeps language alive and growing. The vigour and liveliness that lie behind slang make it a language for fashionable people, and for those who want to avoid the monotony of ordinary language. Thus, fashionable young people use such slang adverbs as for yonks (‘a long time’), in a mo (^ in a moment) and indeedee (^ indeed) to be fresh and to escape the dullness of neutral style [1, 440]. Ø Playfulness: slang is usually playful, since it manipulates words and their meanings. The jocular use of slang is illustrated, for example, by the catch-word Abyssinia, which plays on the pronunciation of the parting salutation I’ll be seeing you!, by the term Eyetalian, which distorts standard Italian (cf. offens. Eyetie), and by nana (^ banana) and cake, used jocularly for ‘a foolish or silly person’. Ø Subject-restriction: sometimes slang is described as the special, even specialized, vocabulary of some profession, occupation or activity in society. This makes slang peculiar to a set of people who are identified by their specific terminology or by the specialized terms they use with ingroup members. In particular, specific slang words such as crack (‘a potent, crystalline form of cocaine’), junkie (‘a drug addict’) and joint (‘a marijuana cigarette’) are related to the topic of drugs, and creep (‘a stealthy robber’), dog (‘an informer; a traitor’), and the Family (‘the thieving fraternity’) are connected with the crime topic. Ø Humour: slang is usually hilarious and as Yust states, “an element of humour is almost always present in slang, usually as humorous exaggeration”. Sometimes the humour of slang is evident (as in antiphrases that are generally accompanied by an ironic intonation), but more frequently it is implied (as in punning or intrinsic ambiguity). The humour of slang is clearly illustrated by the expressions to dance one’s ass/tits off, to work one’s brains off/out and to work one’s guts out, which are exaggerations of the effects produced by excessive dancing, studying or working [6, 78]. Ø Hybridism: slang is sometimes viewed as a hybrid language variety because some foreign words may occur in its vocabulary. Foreign lexical material can be borrowed either as direct loans, as in ciao (‘hello; good-bye’) from Italian, and loco (orig. U.S. ‘mad, insane’) from Spanish, or as loan adaptations, as in capeesh (chiefly U.S. ‘do you understand?’), which is adapted from Italian capisce. In any case, the effect of borrowing is always that of a mixture of languages and cultures. Ø Localism: there are many regional differences in slang. British, American and Australian slang, although they share a common language (English), are viewed as different varieties of it (cf. Brit. slang bloke ‘man, fellow’ and U.S. slang guy), and within each variety, other sub- varieties can be identified. For instance, American slang is often differentiated between Southern and Northern, and within British slang, Cockney is used in the London area. So, while some slang items can be found in all regions of Britain (e.g. knackered ‘exhausted, worn out’), others, such as whistle, are restricted to Cockney [14, 118]. 533 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us Ø Colour: slang has a tendency to be colourful, or, as Andersson and Trudgill suggest, “to make your speech vivid, colourful and interesting”. Yust made reference to the “onomatopoeic colour” of some slang words of the period: e.g., biff (‘a blow, whack’), flabbergast (‘bombast’) and flummox (‘a failure’). Ø Impertinence: slang may be defined as audacious, and be accused of disrespect and impertinence. For instance, it disregards respect for other people with its numerous impolite appellations. Many derogatory terms are coined or used in slang to name outsiders: e.g., the term dago (a corruption of Sp. Diego ‘James’) is used by American people for Spaniards, Portuguese, Italians or any foreigner, Chinkie/-ey/-y and Paki are used by British people to indicate Chinese, Pakistani or South Asian people, whereas Pommie/-y (^ pomegranate) is used in Australia and New Zealand for immigrants from Britain, esp. from England. Ø Secrecy: slang may also be cryptic and exclusive when it is used by certain subgroups to hide their conversations from people in authority. Criminals, for example, use the slang verbs nick and pinch to mean ‘steal (a thing)’, and they employ the polysemous noun stuff (‘money, cash’, ‘stolen goods’, ‘forbidden goods smuggled into a gaol’) to speak secretly about clandestine drug traffic and other forms of illegal behaviour [7, 30]. Ø Musicality: another typical tendency of slang speech is to play with sounds. In particular, rhyme is the favourite sound effect of slang, as amply illustrated by the phenomenon best known as Cockney rhyming slang (e.g. pork-pie ‘a lie’). Yet reduplicatives (e.g. hotsy-totsy ‘comfortable, satisfactory’) and alliteration (e.g. dinky-die Austral. and N.Z. ‘honest, genuine’, kidvid U.S. ‘a video made for children’) also play a role in slang musicality. Ø Privacy: slang is occasionally private, obscure or nearly incomprehensible to outsiders. It generally creates a sense of intimacy among in-group members, but at the same time it may create a sense of exclusion or even rejection among those people who are not part of the group. College students, for instance, show their closeness when they talk about the other sex: e.g., young men use fox and knockout to refer to ‘attractive girls’, and young women use babe and magnet for ‘attractive boys’. But most of these college slang words would be impenetrable to outsiders, esp. parents, teachers and adults in general [17, 4]. Ø Aggressiveness: slang is aggressive and forceful, and at times malicious or even cruel. Sornig cites the aggressive and parodistic undertone of slang, and Allen its “vicious and hostile verbal aggression”. In fact, slang is often used by speakers as a means of provocation or otherwise to express hostility and dislike. Verbal aggression is illustrated, for example, by the numerous slang terms referring to ‘an idiot, fool, crazy, or stupid person’ (airhead, bone- head, cluck, drongo, dumb- dumb, flat-head, goof, knuckle-head, muggins, ning-nong, slob, turkey, etc.) Conclusion. Our examination has shed light on the sociological underpinnings of slang, positioning it as a vibrant form of communication that not only reflects but also shapes cultural nuances, social stratification, and group identity. Slang serves as an expressive tool, fostering inclusivity, constructing social boundaries, and amplifying the sense of belonging within diverse social communities. It emphasizes that the analysis and understanding of slang’s sociological properties offer profound insights into social dynamics, identity construction and the ever- evolving intricacies of linguistic and cultural expression within various societal settings. REFERENCES 1. Norova, M. F. (2020). Connotative meanings in phonetic variants of verbal root-stems (As an example of English and Uzbek languages). Theoretical & Applied Science, (1), 439-442. 2. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). Classification of stylistic colouring words in the English language. Web of Scholars: Multidimensional Research Journal, 1(6), 370-374. 534 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 3. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). ON THE ISSUE OF NATIONAL COLOR IN THE TRANSLATION OF THE STORY “THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA” BY ERNEST HEMINGWAY. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 2(11), 52-58. 4. Norova, M. F. (2017). Jack London’s skill in creating the image of woman (in the example of the stylistic device metaphor). Наука. Мысль: электронный периодический журнал, (4), 80-84. 5. Khaydarov, А. А., & Norova, M. F. (2021). Connotative meanings of phonetically modified words in pronunciation. Scientific reports of Bukhara State University, 5(56), 45-55. 6. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). PECULIARITIES OF ALLITERATION IN EMILY DICKINSON’S POETRY. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 2(11), 76-81. 7. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). THE STYLISTIC CLASSIFICATION OF VOCABULARY. American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research, 2(12), 28- 34. 8. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). PSEUDO-INTERNATIONALISMS IN MEDICAL TRANSLATION. American Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanity Research, 2(12), 13- 20. 9. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2022). EXPRESSIVENESS OF SCIENTIFIC TEXTS. International Journal of Pedagogics, 2(11), 105-112. 10. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). PRAGMATIC VALUES IN PRONUNCIATION OF PHONETICALLY CHANGED WORDS. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(02), 63-67. 11. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). LINGUISTIC STATUS OF PROFESSIONAL JARGONISMS. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(03), 17-23. 12. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). ARCHAISMS IN ENGLISH PROVERBS. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(05), 58-64. 13. Fayzulloyevna, N. M., & Rustamovna, B. N. (2023). EXPRESSIVE FUNCTION OF ENGLISH ARGOT IN A LITERARY TEXT. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(05), 96-102. 14. Fayzulloyevna, N. M., & Rashidovna, B. Z. (2023). PHONOSTYLISTICS IS THE SCIENCE OF STUDYING THE SOUND COMPOSITION OF LITERARY TEXT. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(05), 115-120. 15. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). CATEGORY OF TENSION IN JD SALINGER’S WORKS. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(05), 128-133. 16. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). DIFFICULTIES IN TRANSLATING ARCHAISMS AND HISTORICISMS. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(10), 11-18. 17. Fayzulloyevna, N. M. (2023). STYLISTIC FEATURES OF SOME DIALECTICISMS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE. International Journal Of Literature And Languages, 3(11), 1-8. 18. Habibova, M. N. (2021). Jorjina Houellning “Queen of the desert” biografik asarida gertruda Bell timsoli tasviri. Academic research in educational sciences, 2(2), 770-778. 19. Habibova, M. N. (2021). The theme feminism in the epistolary novels in modern times. ISJ Theoretical & Applied Science, 11(103), 1101-1105. 20. Habibova, M. N. (2022). THE HISTORY OF THE RUSSIAN EPISTOLARY NOVEL IN EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. EURASIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES, PHILOSOPHY AND CULTURE, 2 (3), 135–139. 535 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 21. Habibova, M. N. (2022). EVALUATIVE OBSERVATION ON DH LAWRENCE'S EPISTOLARY ACHIEVEMENT. EURASIAN JOURNAL OF ACADEMIC RESEARCH, 2 (4), 489–494. 22. Habibova, M. (2022). THEORIES OF INTERTEXTUALITY AND THE BASIC FRAMEWORK OF KRISTEVA’S FORMULATION OF HER THEORY OF INTERTEXTUALITY. Eurasian Journal of Social Sciences, Philosophy and Culture, 2(5), 301-307. 23. Habibova, Manzila Nuriddinovna (2022). A BIOGRAPHY IS A SPECIALIZED FORM OF HISTORY AND BASIC TYPES OF BIOGRAPHIES. Oriental renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences, 2 (5), 495-503. 24. Habibova, M. N. (2022). Epistolary Novel as a Scientific Problem. American Journal of Social and Humanitarian Research, 3(10), 211–214. Retrieved from https://www.grnjournals.us/index.php/ajshr/article/view/1575 25. Habibova, M. N. (2022). The Epistolary Form and Art in Modernist Literature. American Journal of Social and Humanitarian Research, 3(10), 206–210. Retrieved from https://www.grnjournals.us/index.php/ajshr/article/view/1574 26. Habibova, M. . (2022). WRITING THE NOVEL OF LETTERS AND THE ANALYSIS OF LETTER FICTION AND DIARY FICTION. International Bulletin of Applied Science and Technology, 2(11), 260–264. Retrieved from https://researchcitations.com/index.php/ibast/article/view/317 27. Habibova, M. . (2022). EPISTOLARY NARRATOLOGY AND CITATIONS FROM AN EPISTOLARY SOURCE: SAMUEL RICHARDSON’S PAMELA AND CLARISSA AND FRANCES BURNEY’S EVELINA. Евразийский журнал академических исследований, 2(12), 1131–1135. извлечено от https://in-academy.uz/index.php/ejar/article/view/6655 28. Manzila Nuriddinovna Khabibova. (2022). JOYCE’S DEVELOPMENT AS AN AUTHOR AND HIS EXPERIMENTS WITH THE EPISTOLARY FORM. American Journal Of Philological Sciences, 2(11), 73–81. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume02Issue11-10 29. Manzila Nuriddinovna Habibova. (2022). LETTER WRITING AS ALLEGORY FOR THE WOMAN WRITER. American Journal Of Philological Sciences, 2(11), 88–92. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume02Issue11-12 30. Хабибова, М. Н. (2022). ЭПИСТОЛЯРНЫЙ РОМАН КАК НАУЧНАЯ ПРОБЛЕМА. Results of National Scientific Research International Journal, 1(9), 394–402. Retrieved from http://academics.uz/index.php/rnsr/article/view/1379 31. Habibova, M. N. . (2023). Origins of the Epistolary Novel and the Principal Epistolary Works. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE LEARNING AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS, 2(2), 70–74. Retrieved from https://inter- publishing.com/index.php/IJLLAL/article/view/1159 32. Khabibova, M. N. . (2023). The Historical Influence of the Epistolary Novel. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LANGUAGE LEARNING AND APPLIED LINGUISTICS, 2(2), 75–79. Retrieved from https://inter- publishing.com/index.php/IJLLAL/article/view/1161 33. Habibova, M. (2023). SPECIFIC POSSIBILITIES WRITING TECHNIQUES USED IN EPISTOLARY FORM AND THEIR EFFECTS ON BOTH THE CHARACTERS AND READERS. Eurasian Journal of Academic Research, 3(5),172–177.Retrieved from https://in- academy.uz/index.php/ejar/article/view/14085 34. Habibova, M. (2023). EPISTOLARY COMPARISONS AND TRENDS. Евразийский журнал академических исследований, 3(5 Part 4), 330–338. извлечено от https://in- academy.uz/index.php/ejar/article/view/16170 536 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 35. Habibova, M. (2023). PRAGMATICS AND COGNITION. Current approaches and new research in modern sciences, 2(10), 90-96. 36. Manzila Nuriddinovna Habibova. (2023). THE CONCEPT OF THE WHITE MAN’S SUPERIORITY AND THE PORTRAYAL OF THE ARABIC CHARACTERS IN “THE LAWRENCE OF ARABIA” AND “THE SEVEN PILLARS OF WISDOM”. Academia Repository, 4(10), 24–31. Retrieved from https://academiarepo.org/index.php/1/article/view/96 37. Habibova, M. N. (2023). Letter Fiction and Diary Fiction. American Journal of Public Diplomacy and International Studies (2993-2157), 1(9), 153–158. Retrieved from http://grnjournal.us/index.php/AJPDIS/article/view/1386 38. Habibova, M. N. (2023). Women and the Epistolary Novel. American Journal of Science on Integration and Human Development (2993-2750), 1(9), 119-124. 39. Mahmudova, D. (2023). CORPORA AND LITERATURE. Current approaches and new research in modern sciences, 2(10), 63-64. 40. Olimova, D. Z., & Mahmudova, M. D. (2022). POLITICAL DISCOURSE AND TRANSLATION. RESEARCH AND EDUCATION, 1(3), 176–179. Retrieved from https://researchedu.org/index.php/re/article/view/577 41. Kholova, M. (2023). PRAGMATICS. В МЕЖДУРОДНАЯ КОНФЕРЕНЦИЯ АКАДЕМИЧЕСКИХ НАУК (Т. 2, Выпуск 10, сс. 68–74). Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10054322 42. Kholova Madina Boboqulovna. (2023). POLITENESS AND CULTURE. Academia Repository, 4(10), 4–9. Retrieved from https://academiarepo.org/index.php/1/article/view/139 43. Yunusova Muattar Shokirovna. (2023). POLYSEMY AND HOMONYMY IN ENGLISH MEDICAL TERMINOLOGY [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10075547