It is suggested that the notion of prestige has been too readily appealed to in explanations of language variation and change, and that such appeals result in apparent contradictions and conceptual confusions. The term "prestige" has been used by sociolinguists in widely differing ways, and, as a result, the nature of the term has become somewhat vague and uncertain. In some instances, at least, a more satisfying explanation is based on the identity function of language (ethnic or gender-related), and notions of prestige can be subsumed and accounted for in identity-based explanations. This approach relies on the observation of the social functions of in-group and out-group norms and the differential social functions of local and supra-local varieties. This approach also draws on the distinction between open and closed groups, and uses a form of cost-benefit analysis in lieu of reliance on the notion of prestige. Patterns of linguistic simplification and studies of the Philadelphia community provide evidence to support this perspective. (MSE)