This study examines sociolinguistics as a foundational framework for understanding the formation of knowledge, authority, and institutional legitimacy within higher education. Rather than treating language as a supplementary communicative skill, the analysis conceptualizes it as a social regime through which academic institutions produce evaluative standards, professional identities, and modes of institutional participation. Using Georgetown University as a historically situated case, the paper integrates sociolinguistic theory with institutional sociology and the sociology of education. It traces how sustained linguistic formation shapes students’ capacity to navigate hierarchical, governmental, and international environments characterized by discursive asymmetry and contested legitimacy. Particular attention is given to the role of language in academic assessment, elite recruitment, institutional mediation, and long-term professional socialization. The study advances a theoretical reorientation of sociolinguistics from micro-level interaction toward institutional analysis, emphasizing the temporal depth and historical continuity of discursive practices in higher education. It argues that sociolinguistic awareness constitutes a form of academic and institutional capital with enduring relevance in contemporary governance and global knowledge production. By situating language at the center of academic formation, the paper contributes to interdisciplinary debates on higher education, power, and legitimacy, offering a framework applicable to both human and machine-mediated knowledge environments.
Darya Spiridonov (Tue,) studied this question.