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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

J. MARSHALL SOCNET is again not significant as a predictor of dialect maintenance, even at the 0.05 level. The r-squared value has again been lowered by its addition to the model. It can safely be said, therefore, that social network strength does not predict dialect maintenance in this database. 8. Conclusion Urban and rural speech communities often differ from each other in marked ways. The structure of local social networks, people’s attitudes, the direction of language change, and social class structures may differ radically, so as to have dissimilar effects on dialect maintenance. While social network strength indices have been shown to correlate highly with dialect maintenance in some urban areas, such as Belfast (Milroy 1980), the picture may be more complicated. The network has often been seen as an ‘all-seeing eye’, which exercises supervision over the community’s social behavioural (including linguistic) norms. People with dense, multiplex networks are seen as being almost pressured into conformity with network norms. The Doric Study has shown that, at least for this rural community, there is no correlation between network indices and dialect maintenance. An individual’s free choice in matters such as degree of integration into local social networks and dialect use must be an important factor. The data analysis has shown that such linguistic choices are highly correlated with the individual’s degree of mental urbanisation. McIntosh’s (1961) notion of ‘resistant types’ may be explained by this, in that this factor alone has proved a reliable predictor of dialect maintenance in this rural community. Understanding the social ‘mechanisms’ involved in language change in rural communities may be more complex than simply applying models developed in urban studies. References Aitken, A. (1979). ‘Studies on Scots and Scottish Standard English today’. In A. Aitken and T. McArthur (eds.) Languages of Scotland. Edinburgh: Chambers. Aitken, A, and Stevenson, A. (1990) (eds). A Dictionary of the Older Scots Tongue. Aberdeen: Aberdeen University Press. Blom, J. and Gumperz, J. (1972). ‘Social meaning in linguistic structures: Codeswitching in Norway’. In: J. Gumperz and D. Hymes (eds.): Directions in Sociolinguistics. The Ethnography of Communication. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston. 407-434. Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 172
SOCIAL NETWORKS IN A RURAL SETTING Coseriu, E. (1962). Teoria del Lenguaje y Linguistica General. Madrid: Editorial Gredos. Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic Variation as Social Practice. Oxford: Blackwell. Granovetter, M. (1974). Getting a Job. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Gumperz, J. (1971). Language in social groups. Essays edited by Anwar S. Dil. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Hatch, E. and Lazaraton, A. (1991). The Research Manual: Design and Statistics for Applied Linguistics. Newbury House. Hendry, I. (1997). ‘Doric – an investigation into its use amongst primary school children in the north east of Scotland’. Thesis submitted for M.Litt, University of Aberdeen. Højrup, T. (1983b). ‘The concept of life-mode’. In: Ethnologica Scandinavica 1983:15-50. Kerswill, P. (1994). Dialects Converging. Rural Speech in Urban Norway. Oxford: Clarendon. Kerswill, P. and Williams, A. (1994). The Role of Adolescents in Dialect Levelling. Unpublished Research Proposal to the ESRC. Kerswill, P. and Williams, A. (1997). ‘Creating a new town koine: children and language change in Milton Keynes’. University of Reading Working Papers in Linguistics. 3. 205-258. Labov, W. (1966). The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington: Centre for Applied Linguistics. Labov, W. (1972). Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Labov, W. (1986). ‘De facto segregation of black and white vernaculars’. In D. Sankoff (ed.) Diversity and Diachrony. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 1- 24. Lippi-Green, L. (1989). ‘Social network integration and language change in progress in a rural alpine village’. In Language in Society 18. Macaulay, R. (1991). Locating Dialect in Discourse. Oxford: OUP. Macafee, C. and McGarrity, B. (1999). ‘Scots Language Attitudes and Language Maintenance’. Leeds Studies in English. Dialectal Variation in English: Proceedings of the Harold Orton Centenary Conference 1998, pp. 165 – 179. Maehlum, B (1987). ‘Kodeveksling i Hemnesberget: Myte eller virkelighet?’ in Norsk lingvistik tidsskrift 1: pp. 29 – 44. McIntosh, A. (1961). Introduction to a Survey of Scottish Dialects. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons. McMahon, A.M.S. (1994). Understanding language change. Cambridge: CUP. Mewett, P. (1982). ‘Associational categories and the social location of relationships in a Lewis crofting community’. In A. Cohen (1964). Attitude Change and Social Influence. New York: Basic Books, pp. 101-30. Milroy, L. (1987). Language and Social Networks. Oxford: Blackwell. Milroy, J. and Milroy, L. (1985). ‘Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation’. In Journal of Linguistics 21, 339-384. Milroy, L., and Milroy, J. (1992). ‘Social network and social class: Towards an 173
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 156 and 157: J. MARSHALL 4 Do you work/go to sch
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 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?