Main points of the Dialectology, connection of the dialectology with geography and sociolinguistics
Dialectology
Dialectology is traditionally defined as a science that studies dialects. The Dictionary of the Royal Spanish Academy (DRAE) presents the "dialectology" What "Treaty or study of dialects". The question of "language and dialect" will be discussed later. Next, the following definitions are presented:
Chambers & Tudgill (1994) mentions that "The dialectology, as is obvious, is the study of the dialect and dialects".
Ramírez (in Alvar, 1996) mentions the following about the dialectology:
“Dialectology is a discipline with a long tradition and a clearly defined methodology to establish geographical borders on the uses of certain linguistic forms, whether phonological, morphological, syntactic or lexical. Among the studies of the traditional dialectology are work on 1) the origin of differentiating features, 2) a geographical area and 4) the standardization of the language in bilingual areas. (…).
Coseriu (cited in Montes, 1999) believes that "The dialectology records and studies the idiomatic variety as such (not reducing it to homogeneity), and tries to get the same way out of the way in which they work, the idiomatic traditions are constituted and modified".
In Montes’s own words (1999) he points out: "I propose to consider dialectology as the linguistic discipline that studies the variants and varieties of historical languages and their integration into unit sets through the articulation of the various norms in force in each language".
Of all the definitions, we will take that of the DRAE and Chambers & Tudgill (1994), not because it is the shortest or most simple, but encompasses and summarizes the definitions presented in a simple way and relates the question that a linguistic system is a language or a dialect.
Language and dialect
DRAE defines the language with two main meanings for linguistic studies: "Verbal communication system of a human community and that usually has writing" Y "Linguistic system considered in its structure". However, in the dialectological field, the language is defined as a set of dialects.
By defining the language as a set of dialects, we should conceptualize the word "dialect". The DRAE defines the dialect with two meanings: "Variety of a language that does not reach the social language category" Y "Linguistic system considered in relation to the group of various derivatives of a common trunk". However, in society, we will find concepts such as those mentioned in Chambers & Tudgill (1994):
“The dialectology, as is obvious, is the study of the dialect and dialects. But what exactly is a dialect? In everyday language a dialect is a form of substantial language, low and often rustic level, which is generally associated with the peasantry, the working class and other groups considered lacking prestige. Dialect is also a term applied often to languages that have no written tradition, especially those spoken in the most isolated places in the world. And finally some classes (often erroneous) of deviations of the norm are also understood as dialects, aberrations of the standard or correct form of a language."
These concepts that have the dialects are usually wrong; Since you cannot have an objective concept thinking that a dialect is more important or relevant than another, all dialects (and in this case, this same prejudice is fulfilled in languages) have the same level, one is nothing more than another. Next, more dialect definitions will be presented:
In the dialectology the following is mentioned: “(…), We believe that it is often very useful to classify dialects as dialects of a language. Dialects can thus be considered as subdivisions of a particular language." (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994: 19-20).
YULE (2008) Distinguish the dialect: "(…) It should be distinguished the term" accent "of the term dialect, which is used to characterize certain grammatical and vocabulary features, in addition to those related to pronunciation."
An issue that raises Coseriu (1982) on the definition of dialect is as follows:
"Thus, in the" objective "sense (as far as designates), the term dialect – continuously to a widespread opinion – does not mean anything other than the term language. But, if every "dialect" is a language, not all "tongue" is a dialect. (…).
Reviewing this statement, the question that is formulated is what is different about the languages of the dialects?
To distinguish and recognize when we are facing a language and when before a dialect, according to Chambers & Tudgill, we must define what a language is. They mention that "A language is a set of mutually intelligible dialects" (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994: 20). Mutual intelligibility or intercomprehension (according to Coseriu, 1982) is when a community that speaks a “x” dialect and another that speaks a “y” dialect can be understood without difficulty, although presented certain lexical, grammatical or semantic modifications. However, the authors present a problem between the Norwegian, the Swedish and the Danish; These linguistic systems are considered each one as languages, but the three are intelligible to each other. In addition, Chambers & Tudgill (1994) present another case of German: “(…), While the German is considered a single language, there are however certain types of German that are unintelligible for speakers of other types of German." It has started from this statement, they mention that "Our definition, therefore, would lead us to define the Danish as something less than a language and German as more than a language" (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994).
From that, we can conclude that the concept of "language and dialect" is not purely linguistic, it depends more on the extralinguistic, either because of the importance that the speaker gives to his language. There are speakers who consider the "empowered" or "relevant" languages for them the true range of language, and to which other languages with the least number of speakers consider them as "dialects". This is a very common prejudice in society and it is they who actually grant the true range if a linguistic system is a language or a dialect. In most cases, intelligibility does not define the language or dialect since there are cases in which the speaker rejects that will to understand a linguistic system. In conclusion, the concept of language and dialect and its differentiation, currently, remains a very broad problem, since linguists can call a linguistic system as a dialect. However, speakers can reject this denomination since they consider this system as a language.
Dialectal Continuum
Carbajal (2004) in his degree thesis mentions the following:
“(…), A dialect not differs from a dialect. Dialectal limits are blurred, it is not possible to draw a unique dividing line between two varieties." (Chambers and Trudill, 1994; Romaine, 1996 and Cerron-Palomino, 1973, cited in Carbajal, 2004: 27).
Chambers & Tudgill point out the following example with which it implies what a continuum would be:
“If we examine the spoken dialects in rural areas, we find many parts of the world where the following situation occurs: if we travel from one town to another, in a particular direction, we appreciate linguistic differences that distinguish a town from another from another. Sometimes these differences will be large, on other small occasions, but they will be cumulative. The farther we are from the starting point, the differences will be made increasing. The effect, therefore, may be that, if the distance implies is large enough, (if we order the peoples along our route in a geographical order), while the people’s speakers understand the townspeople of the people B Very good and to those of the people F, quite well, they may understand the speech of the people with considerable difficulty and not understand those of the people Z. On the other hand, the speakers of M will probably understand the speech of the people F quite well and to the inhabitants of the A and Z with difficulty. In other words, dialects of the ends of the geographical area may or may not be mutually intelligible, but will be connected by a mutual intelligibility chain. There is no point that the rupture is so complete that the geographically adjacent dialects are not mutually intelligible, but the cumulative effect of linguistic differences will be such that, the greatest the geographical separation, the greater the difficulty of understanding."
In conclusion, the dialects do not have a border established between one dialect and another; Rather we find a dialectal continuum.
Chambers & Tudgill (1994) present two types of continuum: the "continuous" geoctal and the "continuous" sociolectal; The aforementioned paragraph describes a situation of a geoctal continuum; However, the authors mention that “The continuous dialects can also be social instead of geographical, and the continuing of this type can also pose problems." (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994: 25). On this occasion, we are more interested in the definition of Dialectal or Geoctal continu.
Isoglosose
The isoglosa term first used J. G. A. Bielenstein, a Latvian dialectologist, in 1892. Apparently neologism based on the isothermous meteorological term, the line that divides two places with the same average temperature. Isoglosa literally means "equal language" (ISO + gloss). Presumably wants to express the fact that a line drawn through a region will show two areas in each of which some aspect of linguistic use coincides, but that differ from each other. (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994: 139).
Chambers & Tudgill (1994) have a definition of isoglosic, but there are other scholars who present another definition or use this term in different situations.
The DRAE mentions that the isoglosa is a "Imaginary line that on a map represents the limits of the same linguistic phenomenon with the intermediate points between them".
Yule (2008) points out that the isoglosa “(…) It represents a limit between two different areas in regards to a certain linguistic element."
Alcaraz & Martínez (1997) mention the following:
“A basic concept of these atlas is that of isoglosose (term coined by imitation of the isobaras), which are ideal lines that, while joining the points where the same phonetic, lexical phenomena, etc., They mark their spatial scope. When the "isoglosa" refers exclusively to lexical forms is called isolecto."
As Carvajal (2004) points out, one of the main problems of dialectology and in turn of its methodology, geolinguistics, has been the determination of isoglosic, of the boundaries between two geographical areas that differ in a linguistic feature.
Linguistic geography
Linguistic geography is defined by the DRAE as follows: "Geography that studies the distribution of the linguistic phenomena of a language over the territory in which it is spoken". This definition does not completely specify what linguistic geography would actually be (or, as is currently called "geolinguistics").
Alcaraz & Martínez (1997) point out about linguistic geography the following: "Linguistic geography, also called spatial linguistics, is the branch of dialectology that studies the distribution and geographical extension of linguistic forms (syntactic, lexical, phonetic) in linguistic atlas". The definition presented by these authors is more exact than the previous one, since it mentions a method used by linguistic geography; However, those who present a more complete and precise definition that contributes to dialectology and linguistics are Chambers & Tudgill (1994).
Linguistic geography arises as a result of negrammatic; Those considered a fundamental principle that was as follows: Ausnahmslosigkeit der Lautgesetze, or "phonetic changes do not admit exception". With this hypothesis, dialectal evidence was obviously relevant. As a consequence, linguistic geography, a methodology or a set of methods to collect the testimonies of dialect differences,. (Chambers & Tudgill, 1994: 37)
The methods used by linguistic geography that also contribute to the dialectology will be described in the next chapter "Methodology and Diatopic Research Techniques".
Dialectology and sociolinguistics
As mentioned in the first part of this chapter (dialectology), the concept of DRAE and Chambers & Tudgill (1994) will be taken: "The dialectology studies the dialects". However, there is a linguistic interdiscipline closely linked to dialectology, there are even times when both are confused, but they are different, this interdiscipline is called "sociolinguistic".
Sociolinguistics is defined by the DRAE as follows: "Discipline that studies relationships between language and society".
Yule (2008) points out that "In general terms, sociolinguistics deals with the analysis of the relationships between language and society".
Silva-Corvalán (1989) conceptualizes sociolinguistics as follows:
“(…), We could define sociolinguistics as the study of those linguistic phenomena that are related to social factors. These social factors include the different systems of political, economic, social or geographical organization of a community, individual factors that have repercussions on social organization in general, such as age, sex and level of education, the ethnicity of the individual, aspects historical, the immediate situation surrounding the interaction; In a word, what has been called the external context in which linguistic events occur."
Alcaraz & Martínez (1997) define sociolinguistics as “(…) Branch of linguistics that studies the relationships between language, individual and social groups. (…) It is a recent discipline, born in the second half of the twentieth century, although a history of linguistic geography and dialectology can be found."
As the concepts of sociolinguistics have been exposed, the difference between these two very linked and different disciplines is observed; By using the term "different", it does not imply the concept of "exclusion", since despite having their own relationship with the language, they complement each other in methodology and analysis; Moreover, as Alcaraz & Martínez (1997) mentions, sociolinguistics has its background in the dialectology, that is, they are very connected disciplines not only by the theoretical and methodological foundations, but also the history unites them.
Leave feedback