DZ
DefZone.Net

Kien thuc cong nghe & giai tri

Wiki Article

Talk:Dialectology

Nguồn dữ liệu từ Wikipedia, hiển thị bởi DefZone.Net

Xem trên WikipediaBài ngẫu nhiên khác

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GOLDS.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sociolinguistics

[edit]

The Sociolinguistics page currently has subheadings for variation linked to region, class, age, and gender. Each of these needs some attention. There is currently no information concerning regional variation on the Sociolinguistics page beyond a link to Dialectology. It would be wonderful if the Dialectology page editors would add a few lines to the Sociolinguistics page; it would also be great if someone(s) would undertake to create pages related to language and social class, age-linked language variation, and language and gender. Unfortunately I don't have the time to undertake any of these programs myself. I am therefore pleading for your help. I am also posting this message at the talk:Linguistlist and talk:Sociolinguistics pages. Cnilep (talk) 19:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Regiolect

[edit]

The page Regiolect was merged into this one. Regiolect had no talk page. The page also cited no sources, so I have added a {fact} tag to the merged content. Cnilep (talk) 16:23, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I re-redirected Regiolect to Dialect, which is a more appropriate target. "Regiolect" is not a commonly used term, and the sentence added here had basically no content, so I have removed it; I did add mention of "regiolect" as an alternative term to the article Dialect, though. AJD (talk) 18:22, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Dialect

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Following discussion, the pages were merged. Cnilep (talk) 19:04, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page "Dialect" is rather long and may need cleanup. So I proprose to move some of its content, especially under "Concept of dialectology", into this article. Only some small adaptations would be necessary. Solejheyen (talk) 20:05, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Types of dialectology

[edit]

It's my understanding, after doing a bit of reading of Petyt (1980), that dialectology can be split into at least three types.

The last two especially are based in part on the dominant theoretical linguistic models, which means there may be even more paradigm-based variations of dialectology. It might be worth mentioning this in the article. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 01:46, 26 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Subfield of sociolinguistics

[edit]

Can dialectology be considered a subfield of socioliguistics when it'd been studied for decades before sociolinguistics was established? Epa101 (talk) 21:20, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. It's not a matter of which came first but of what is the more general topic. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 21:40, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What about old-fashioned dialectologists who reject the bulk of sociolinguistic theory? For example, Graham Shorrocks, who has investigated the speech of Newfoundland as well as his native Bolton. Epa101 (talk) 19:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I added a sentence on Shorrocks's view. After reading him more carefully, I concluded that he doesn't so much reject sociolinguistic theory as reject the criticisms that sociolinguists (in England at least) made of traditional dialectology. He also dislikes the sociolinguists' reliance on questionnaires, but I didn't mention that. Epa101 (talk) 13:55, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Class Assignment: Wiki Assignment 3

[edit]

I feel that this article did an excellent job at staying on topic, and I really liked how specific the author(s) were. It was interesting reading about the similarities in dialect between the Romance Languages, and about the Norwegian dialects. However, I do think it would be interesting to read something about the difference between certain dialects in Asia, such as Mandarin and Cantonese, and the regional dialects throughout Japan and Korea. There is a sufficient number of sources listed in the "References" and "Further Readings" sections, which are scholarly and strong, but I noticed the citation for the Cambridge University article was mentioned twice, with only slight differences between the two, and whether one was retrieved from a website was not determined in either of the citations. Furthermore, none of the claims seemed heavily biased, rather they are clear and thorough, and seem to be cited properly.

--Sakuragalaxxy (talk) 20:03, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dialectology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:22, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Dialects of" rubrics under History mislabeled

[edit]

I've edited Dialects of Italian... to Italian dialects..., as none of the languages reported in the Sprach- und Sachatlas are dialects of Italian, and stating that they are misinforms readers conceptually and factually. Typologically, most are Gallo-Romance or Italo-Romance, sister languages of the Florentine that served as the basis for the eventual development of Italian, with the dialetti autochthonous, in no sense a dialect of or otherwise a variant of another language. In principle and mutatis mutandis, the same is true of the atlas of France, as stated in the Wikipedia article dedicated to it: "The Atlas linguistique de la France (ALF, Linguistic Atlas of France) is an influential dialect atlas of Romance varieties in France" (emphasis added) -- not of dialects of French, as a glance at any number of its maps makes rather clear. Map 62 s'asseoir, for example, is replete with forms such as s'asir, s'aseta, s'asedre, and many others (diacritics of transcriptions stripped here), bearing the same relation to French s'asseoir that sintasi, s'assettare, setasi and many others in the Italian atlas do to Italian sedersi -- cognates in sister languages. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 02:43, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this might be an example of when you use English-language sources to understand dialectology in other languages: the authors can not realise what is important in the country in question. Epa101 (talk) 21:48, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, might well be. I've read some oddities (euphemism) in other languages, too, though. As well as things written in English by scholars not from anglophone countries, the most striking in my memory being a francophone who referred to Gascon as "a dialect of French." And for misleading (at the very least) check out the opening of the Garman dialects article here: "German dialects are the various traditional local varieties of the German language", then click on the German language link to find out what those are varieties of: "the majority and official (or co-official) language in Germany, Austria, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein." Yikes! Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 04:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the Atlas Linguarum Europae (disclosure: I'm now on the committee), it refers to "gallo-roman et catalan" in most of France. https://archive.org/details/atlas-linguarum-europae-list-of-sites/page/295/mode/2up?view=theater
Then there is some "francoprovençal et occitan" in Italy. https://archive.org/details/atlas-linguarum-europae-list-of-sites/page/305/mode/2up?view=theater
However, German is just down as "allemand". Even the language of Luxembourg is described as "allemand".
I'm not very familiar with these ways of dividing up dialects. I don't know if they make more sense to you? Epa101 (talk) 08:33, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not clear to me what those labels are meant to represent. Some seem to be very broad typological breakdowns. On p. 303, for example, IRLANDE, irlandais (C) vs. IRLANDE, anglais (G), i.e. Irish (Celtic) then English (Germanic). Fair enough. But further down on the page is ITALIE, italien (R), the first in the list being San Vigilio di Marebbe, where the autochthonous native language is Ladin, R to be sure, but Italian only in the sense that it's spoken in Italy, and then similar non-Italian going down the list on 303-304. To some it seems to make sense to shoehorn Ladin into a very broad Italo-Dalmatian category, but that's quite a stretch. And in any case, since categories like francoprovençal et occitan are admissible, the italien label rather than rhéto-romane would probably not stand up in linguistic court. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 14:08, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you on this. I noticed that Sicilian is counted as a separate language. I'm not sure whether this is more different than any other Italian speech from Standard Italian. Maybe being an island makes it easier to make a clear distinction. Epa101 (talk) 08:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good point about the island. There's no principled linguistic reason to label Sicilian "a language"; underlying and historically predating the Italian that almost everybody can speak quite fluently nowadays is the usual dialect continuum (and two linguists can bicker at length about how much the Strait of Messina breaks the continuum with the mainland). Geography and history, including that forms of Sicilian have long been used for literature, conspire to encourage non-specialists to view a typology as "a language", further nourished by the tendency to label autochonous local speech types by Italian regione (Calabrese... Abruzzese... Umbrian... Ligurian, etc. etc.). Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. There's a lot to do on this article. Epa101 (talk) 22:34, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very Anglophone view

[edit]

I suggest that this page be given a warning that it does not represent a worldwide view of the topic. Although it does mention some other Western European countries, these are from English-language sources. I feel that this could be improved. Germany has an entire library in Marburg dedicated to its Sprachatlas. The Atlas Linguarum Europae shows that there is dialectology going on in virtually every part of Europe, but Eastern Europe and Scandinavia are barely covered here. I also think that this is relevant to the previous subject of whether dialectology is just a subset of sociolinguistics, as I get the impression that sociolinguistics is largely the preserve of the Anglophone world yet dialectology is being done far beyond that. What do others think about a header? Epa101 (talk) 21:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've now added a "globalize" template to the top. Epa101 (talk) 08:26, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea. A wider treatment will most likely have to deal with two conceptualizations of the term dialect -- one assuming variety of language x, the other something like autochthnous local language, but the encounter of the two might produce salubrious results. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 14:24, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good stuff. I've noticed that the German Wikipedia has numerous articles on its dialectologists, which didn't surprise me when dialectology has received more academic support in Germany than in Britain. I'll see if I can reproduce (in the correct way, of course) material from the German Wikipedia. Epa101 (talk) 08:48, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The map

[edit]

The Scandinavian section includes where Sámi is spoken, but that's not in a continuum with Norwegian or Swedish.

In a similar problem, the Basque region is not shown separately in France or Spain, but Basque is not a Romance language.

Should the map be adjusted for this? Epa101 (talk) 21:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That would make it different from the source cited for it. Maybe add notes to the caption? Kanguole 22:28, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked the source: I believe that it is page 6 here. The map has been amended already. There is no "East Romance" part on the source map. The map on this article has also added Britain, Ireland and Iceland, which might cause those unfamiliar with the subject to ask if Britain is in the West Germanic group or Iceland is in the Scandinavian group. I feel that recognising the continuing existence of Sámi and Basque is no less justifiable than these changes. However, if that is too much work, then I'm happy just to add notes to the caption. Epa101 (talk) 21:43, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just occurred to me: there is also Breton in the north-west of France, which is a Celtic and not a Romance language. I understand that this language is severely endangered but, if we just go with the caption, we might as well mention it in the list alongside Sámi and Basque. Epa101 (talk) 21:46, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've now added to the caption. Epa101 (talk) 08:26, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]