Semantic Changes of Common Words and Expressions in Prison Language according to the Social Variables of Gender, Age, Education, and Status

Authors
B. Rahbar 1
A. Masnabadi 2
M. Raza 3
1 Assistant Professor of Linguistics, Department of Linguistics, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran
2 PhD student of linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan Branch, Iran
3 Assistant professor of Linguistics in Islamic Azad University of Zanjan
Abstract
The linguistic variety spoken by the prisoners and the words and expressions used by them in their conversations has attracted a lot of attention. This variety is sometimes so different from the one used outside the prison walls that it is almost unfathomable for those who have never been exposed to it. This variety is idiosyncratic in terms of phonology, morphology, and semantics. The study of prison language and its relevant words and expressions is of great significance from sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, cognitive linguistic, and criminology points of views. Due to significance and the paucity of domestic linguistic studies on the prison language, this study, within the framework of sociolinguistics, made an attempt to bring the semantic features into considerations and delve into the semantic changes of related words and expressions in the prison language with respects to the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status and respond to the following two research questions: First, What are the main semantic changes of words and expressions in the language of prison? Second, what are the relationships between semantic changes and the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status? In order to collect the data, observation and interviews were utilized. The data included 615 and 496 idioms and expressions used by male and female prisoners respectively (total expressions amounted to 1111). The number of all interviewees was 70, consisting of 20 females from Rey Prison and 50 males from four prisons of Raja’ee Shahr, Ghezelhesar, Fashafooye, and Tehran. The results showed that four semantic processes of metaphor, Irony, metonymy, and semantic degradation accounted for the main sources of semantic changes of words and expressions in the language of prison. Regarding the effects of the four variables of gender, age, education, and social status on these semantic processes, it was concluded that gender did not bring about any significant change in the speech of male and female prisoners, though it was effective on the frequency of use of those semantic processes. Some expressions were specific only to men and some were female specific. Out of the other three variables (age, education, and social status), the two variables of education and social status had the most effects on the use of semantic changes among the prisoners. The effect of age is more than that of social status and education and is less than that of gender. In sum, it can be concluded that as education and social status increase, the use of words and expressions in the language of prison decreases. In contrast, as education and social status decrease, the prisoners are more influenced by the language of prison and they use more semantic processes in their speech.

Keywords

Subjects

• Abdi, A. (2008). The Impact of Prison on Prisoner: Social Pathology. Tehran: Noor Research and Publishing Institute. [In Persian].
• Aghzeinali, Z. & H. Aghhoseini, (2008), “The analytical comparison of allusion and irony in Persian and English literature”. Inquiry of Persian Language and Literature. 17. Pp: 95-128. [In Persian].
• Bondeson, U.V. (1989). Prisoners in Prison Societies. New Brunswick. NJ: Transaction Publications.
• Bussmann, H. (1996). Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics (Translated and edited by G. Trauth and K. Kazzazi). London/New York: Routledge.
• Einat, T. & H. Einat, (2000),“Inmate argot as an expression of prison subculture: The Israeli case”. The Prison Journal. 80. Pp: 309–25.
• Ekrami, M. (2005). Anthropology of Intimate idioms: Anthropological Research on the Intimate Youth Idioms. Mashhad: Isar. [In Persian].
• Encinas, G. (2001). Prison argot: A sociolinguistic and lexicographic study. New York: University Press of America.
• Green, J. (2011). Greens Dictionary of Slang. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hashemi, P. (2009). Graffiti of Qasr Prison. Tehran: Cheshmeh. [In Persian].
• Hodson, R.A. (2000). Sociolinguistics (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Lighter, J. E. (1994). Historical dictionary of American slang. New York: Random House.
• Looser, D. (2004). “Lexicography on the inside: Doing time in every New Zealand prison”. International Journal of Lexicography. 7(1). Pp. 69–87.
• Masnabadi, A. (2011). Prison Language: A Look at Linguistic Representations in Offenders of Tehran and Alborz Prisons. MA Thesis of Linguistics, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch [In Persian].
• Mathew, D. (2013). “Prison language: A psychoanalytic approach to the language of British young offenders in the twenty-first century”. International Forum of Psychoanalysis. 22(2) .Pp: 95-107.
• Mayr, A. (2004). Prison Discourse: Language as a Means of Control and Resistance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Mayr, A. (2013). “Prison Language”. In, C. A. Chapelle (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (Pp: 4662-4667). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
• Murphy, M.L. & A. Koskela, (2010), Key Terms in Semantics. London/New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Rahbar, B. & A. Masnabadi ,(2016), Prison Language: Linguistic Analysis and Term Glossary. Tehran: Giva .[In Persian].
• Richards, J. & R. Schmidt, (2010), Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. London: Longman.
• Safavi, K. (2004). An Introduction to Semantics. Tehran: Soureh Mehr .[In Persian].
• Shams, A. (2003). A New Approach to Wardership: A Blissful Return. Tehran: The Organization of Prisons and Protective Affairs: ways of Education .[In Persian].
• Shams, A. (2008). An Introduction to the Sociology of Prison. Tehran: Way of Education. [In Persian].
• Shams, A. (2013). Prison Pathology. Tehran: Sociologist .[In Persian].
• Simelane, L. (2016). “A case study of the linguistic variety of women in the Mawelawela correctional institution, Swaziland”. Linguistics and Literature Studies. 4(2). Pp: 109-117.
Language Related Research
Volume 11, Issue 2 - Serial Number 56
May and June 2020
Pages 33-58