Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

J. MARSHALL 4 Do you work/go to school with at least two other locals of the same sex? 5 Do you spend time with work/school friends after work/school, or during weekends and holidays? 6 Do you take part in a local group (organised or non organised) in the area? (religion, scouts, guides, youth groups, DofE, sports, jobs, holiday activities, hunting, cards, bridge). 7 Do you take part in leisure or sports activities with 2 or more locals or work/school friends? 8 have your mother and father lived here all their lives? The Doric SOCNET score is a network index score, or a combination of interactional and structural criteria (mostly the former), which has been used to test whether a high social network score will predict a high (conservative) dialect index score. The range is zero (minimal network density and multiplexity) to eight (maximal). The Doric index has limitations for structural criteria, such as the following: 1) Size 2) Density 3) Centrality 4) Clustering 5) Network role of the speaker It does, however, accurately measure the interactional criteria of the network, and as such is similar to Milroy’s network strength index: 1) Number & frequency of interactions 2) Multiplexity 3) Strength 4) Content The questionnaire was based closely on Milroy’s and Pedersen’s questionnaires, and this makes the scores obtained comparable to theirs. A more complex and structurally oriented measure could not have been achieved without spending an extremely lengthy period of time in the fieldwork area, living among, and interacting with local people. 152
SOCIAL NETWORKS IN A RURAL SETTING 6.8. Life Modes and the Present Study Pedersen believes that life modes are not specifiable to the point where one can measure them directly, but that they can illuminate linguistic and other behavioural patterns within sociologically defined groups. In this study however, a section of the questionnaire was developed to yield an index score for life modes, which can be compared with that of social networks. This takes the form of a section of questions with gradable answers along a five-point scale (see below). The answers were graded from zero to four 6 , reflecting a mental orientation to either a rural or urban life, or a mental urbanisation index. An index score was arrived at for each speaker, with a maximum score (40) indicating a completely rural, and zero a completely urban life mode. There were similar sections assessing attitude towards Scottish identity and the Doric, which did not prove to be reliable predictors of dialect maintenance. All these scores were compared with the social network scores, to explain linguistic variation between individuals who have the same network scores. The scale used for this section of the questionnaire was graded as follows: 0 strongly agree 1 agree 2 neutral 3 disagree 4 strongly disagree Here follows the section of the questionnaire on life mode: 1) I notice what people are wearing in Aberdeen. I like to keep up with fashion. 2) I mostly watch TV programs about city life and avoid nature/ environmental programs. 3) I would like to follow a career in a city rather than one where I work in the country or a small town around here. 4) I think it is very important to own a PC or at least have access to one at school/work. 5) I would love to move away from this area to the city. 6) When I am in Aberdeen, I feel at home and unstressed by the crowds and traffic. 7) City folk are just as friendly as anyone, and are basically the same as country folk. 6 Or four down to zero, depending on whether the question related positively or negatively to the particular category. This was done in order to avoid a cumulative effect of consistent positive questioning about one view or the other. 153
Page 1 and 2:
Reading Working Papers in Linguisti
Page 3:
Reading Working Papers in Linguisti
Page 6 and 7:
K ALJENAIE testing ground. To what
Page 8 and 9:
K ALJENAIE causative form is basica
Page 10 and 11:
K ALJENAIE person diagram, the two
Page 12 and 13:
K ALJENAIE 3.2 Data Analysis The sa
Page 14 and 15:
K ALJENAIE Table 4 Osama’s longit
Page 16 and 17:
K ALJENAIE The asterisk indicates t
Page 18 and 19:
K ALJENAIE which is the transitive
Page 20 and 21:
K ALJENAIE confirming Hyams (1986)
Page 22 and 23:
K ALJENAIE Table 12 Sara’s realiz
Page 24 and 25:
K ALJENAIE Table 15 Number of Infle
Page 26 and 27:
K ALJENAIE masculine forms are cons
Page 28 and 29:
K ALJENAIE Motar, A. (1969). Khasai
Page 30 and 31:
P. COUTSOUGERA Plural Plural Singul
Page 32 and 33:
P. COUTSOUGERA e.g. [peδja'] *[pe
Page 34 and 35:
P. COUTSOUGERA Tableau 1: Opacity i
Page 36 and 37:
P. COUTSOUGERA As can be seen, in r
Page 38 and 39:
P. COUTSOUGERA 6.1 Selection of the
Page 40 and 41:
P. COUTSOUGERA /alevr-I-a/ Tableau
Page 42 and 43:
P. COUTSOUGERA different areas of t
Page 44 and 45:
P. COUTSOUGERA ruled out as it viol
Page 46 and 47:
P. COUTSOUGERA operation McCarthy p
Page 48 and 49:
P. COUTSOUGERA Tableau 6: Applicati
Page 50 and 51:
P. COUTSOUGERA References Anderson,
Page 52 and 53:
R. INGHAM cognitive deficits. They
Page 54 and 55:
R. INGHAM 2. Subjects and hypothese
Page 56 and 57:
R. INGHAM good as their CA matches
Page 58 and 59:
R. INGHAM 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30
Page 60 and 61:
R. INGHAM Did the [+LD] group perfo
Page 62 and 63:
R. INGHAM using the Wilcoxon ranked
Page 64 and 65:
R. INGHAM representations but also
Page 66 and 67:
R. INGHAM Van der Lely, H., & L. St
Page 68 and 69:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS some vene
Page 70 and 71:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS far soone
Page 72 and 73:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS outside l
Page 74 and 75:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS 3. Intern
Page 76 and 77:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS • Varia
Page 78 and 79:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Despite s
Page 80 and 81:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS naturalne
Page 82 and 83:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS apparent
Page 84 and 85:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Summary f
Page 86 and 87:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Table 2 T
Page 88 and 89:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS regard it
Page 90 and 91:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS The ‘gr
Page 92 and 93:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Table 4 (
Page 94 and 95:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS sociodemo
Page 96 and 97:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS Bardovi-H
Page 98 and 99:
P. KERSWILL & A. WILLIAMS språkfö
Page 100 and 101:
S. KULKARNI in the Indian caste hie
Page 102 and 103:
S. KULKARNI ideologies, each emphas
Page 104 and 105:
S. KULKARNI century. The Sabha was,
Page 106 and 107: S. KULKARNI The main study includes
Page 108 and 109: S. KULKARNI 4. Quantitative Analyse
Page 110 and 111: S. KULKARNI comparatively lower (in
Page 112 and 113: S. KULKARNI Table 3: Percentage use
Page 114 and 115: S. KULKARNI showing an almost compl
Page 116 and 117: S. KULKARNI 50 mean % std. score 40
Page 118 and 119: S. KULKARNI 100 mean % std. score 9
Page 120 and 121: S. KULKARNI Marathi the kin term /m
Page 122 and 123: S. KULKARNI not by the less-privile
Page 124 and 125: S. KULKARNI Bapuji, B.R. (1994).
Page 126 and 127: S. KULKARNI Sastry, J.V. (1993). Re
Page 128 and 129: J. MARSHALL 2. Change versus Resist
Page 130 and 131: J. MARSHALL have become more expose
Page 132 and 133: J. MARSHALL anthropologists. As man
Page 134 and 135: J. MARSHALL for data such as Milroy
Page 136 and 137: J. MARSHALL To some extent, [networ
Page 138 and 139: J. MARSHALL these close-knit ties a
Page 140 and 141: J. MARSHALL Life mode 1. Life modes
Page 142 and 143: J. MARSHALL There are, however, som
Page 144 and 145: J. MARSHALL can choose a high level
Page 146 and 147: J. MARSHALL Pedersen therefore, lik
Page 148 and 149: J. MARSHALL case that these people
Page 150 and 151: J. MARSHALL 6. Research Question an
Page 152 and 153: J. MARSHALL ‘are high in frequenc
Page 154 and 155: J. MARSHALL 6.5. Morphological Vari
Page 158 and 159: J. MARSHALL 8) I never eat brose or
Page 160 and 161: J. MARSHALL mentioned, a ‘real ti
Page 162 and 163: J. MARSHALL 3. LEXREC. This is an i
Page 164 and 165: J. MARSHALL which comes nearest to
Page 166 and 167: J. MARSHALL LIFMODLEXREC 60 50 40 L
Page 168 and 169: J. MARSHALL the different tests wer
Page 170 and 171: J. MARSHALL PHOVAR = 21.1 + 0.573 A
Page 172 and 173: J. MARSHALL There is no significant
Page 174 and 175: J. MARSHALL 7.6. SOCNET as a Predic
Page 176 and 177: J. MARSHALL SOCNET is again not sig
Page 178 and 179: J. MARSHALL integrated sociolinguis
Page 180 and 181: I. SINKA, M. GARMAN AND C. SCHELLET
show all

Reading Working Papers in Linguistics 4 (2000) - The University of ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?