Not so super: The ontology of 'supervernaculars'

Abstract

This article offers a critical response to Blommaert's notion of 'supervernaculars'. The discussion focuses on the tenability of the ontological assumptions which underlie its introduction. It is argued that despite the superficial terminological innovation, the concept of 'supervernaculars' rests on a quite orthodox ontology of language and communication, that is to say one which posits abstract artefactual entities existing over and above individual communicational situations and affirms a code-based view of language. Consequently, the category of the 'supervernacular' fails to provide a satisfactory theoretical framework with which to describe the types of 'mixed' language use frequently encountered in certain modern communicative practices. A more coherent and indeed prosaic account of such practices can instead be had by arguing on the basis of a Harrisian critique of orthodox linguistics. © 2012 Elsevier Ltd.