Search

This paper examines how California college students perceive vernacular functions of the word LIKE. It aims at testing the hypothesis that LIKE may potentially induce stigma because it can be perceived as a 'female' marker. Four versions of a short text were created from an original source. Texts featured either 30 occurrences of LIKE, 20, 10, or none at all. 123 participants were recruited and were asked to read only one version. They were then asked to rate their perception of the anonymous utterer on six variables: age, pleasantness, friendliness, education, competence, and gender. Finally, they were asked to describe what they associate with the speech style of a stereotypical persona: the Valley Girl. Results suggest that the number of LIKE in a text does not significantly influence the perception of an anonymous utterer, though participants do associate it with Valley Girl speak (Valspeak). Paradoxically, some participants report they despise the word LIKE but no evidence suggests they actually do stigmatize it in the perception study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the use of like as a discourse marker and discourse particle in the spontaneous speech of children age 3-10. Data come from recorded interactions between same-sex peers. Discourse like appeared in the speech of children as young as age 4. Young children used like primarily as a discourse particle preceding determiner phrases. Like was observed in a greater number of syntactic positions as speakers' ages increased and began to appear in different syntactic positions in approximately the order in which they developed in the language historically. Boys age 6 and younger were less likely than girls to use like and used it less frequently and in fewer syntactic positions than girls. The results suggest that boys and girls follow similar developmental trajectories but that girls become more sophisticated users of like at an earlier age than boys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study on the use of the expression like, as a medium of sarcasm. It discusses two competing accounts of its semantic contributions, and examines data for weighing out the theories leading to the conclusion that like functions to mark an illocutionary force. Other details explored are the significant differences between the general phenomenon of sarcasm and the sarcastic use of like.

A comparison across spontaneous speech collected in the 1980s and the 2000s reveals a dramatic flip between the use of said versus like as enquoting devices. The greater use of like is reflected in a wide variety of quotation types including reported speech, thoughts, exclamations, and sounds. There is no evidence that like's increase in use corresponds to an increasing desire to explicitly indicate slippage between the words used in a report and those of the original source. Instead, like can substitute for said and be used in more environments, selectively depicting aspects of the original quote (Clark & Gerrig, 1990; Wade & Clark, 1993). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates the function of like when it occurs in numerically quantified contexts. The pragmatic literature espouses two distinct positions on this topic, though neither has yet been tested empirically. On the one hand, like is argued to be a genuine pragmatic particle, indistinguishable from other discourse uses of this lexeme. Alternatively, others argue that in numerical contexts like carries propositional content and in this respect, it functions adverbially. Quantitative analysis from a large corpus of contemporary English suggests the latter: like is an approximative adverb, alternating with the more traditional form about in the spoken vernacular. However, the perspective afforded by apparent time reveals rapid, ongoing change whereby the traditional adverb is in the process of being ousted. The pattern of change therefore suggests lexical replacement. Among older speakers the preferred form for approximation is about, while among younger speakers the form of choice is like. These results thus indicate that what has previously been treated as a single entity, discourse like, is in fact two distinct forms: like the adverb and like the particle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While much is known about the concept of likability, a single encompassing tool to measure likability has yet to be created. The Reysen Likability Scale measures the degree of likability for a target source. Using the current scale, a total of 150 participants rated 12 individuals who were videotaped while reading a paragraph. Tapes differed with respect to whether the people genuinely laughed, faked their laughter, or did not laugh while reading a paragraph. In the present study, the reliability, and convergent and divergent validity of the new scale were assessed. Coefficient alphas for the current scale ranged from .90 to .91. Laughter predicted higher likability ratings which demonstrated convergent validity. Divergent validity was illustrated using Goldberg's (1992) 100-Adjective Big Five Personality Test. Suggestions for research using the new scale are given. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reflects on the pervasiveness of the word like in the cultural lexicon. It emphasizes that this speech pattern has nothing to do with the intelligence of the speaker. It explains the various purposes of the word for the speaker. It argues that this kind of academic speech have implications for students' social and intellectual habits.