Geographical Dialectology

This chapter examines how linguists have investigated the very obvious fact that different places house different dialects. We will not look at the results of such work nor how they have been used to answer linguistic and sociolinguistic questions (see Britain 2009, in press). Here we simply examine the steps dialectologists take and have taken to conduct multi-locality research on language variation. In order to do so, five studies from different time periods are presented and critiqued, examining a number of key methodological elements in each: 1. The aim of geographical dialectology is to examine variation across space, in different places. How do dialectologists then decide which places in that space to analyse? Why choose one village and not its neighbour? Why avoid that city? This question goes to the very heart of the geographical motivation of the research. 2. What sorts of speakers will be sampled from these locations? 3. What type of data is to be collected from these speakers? 4. In what circumstances is that data to be recorded? Who will collect it, in what setting and how will the voices of the speakers be captured for later analysis? As we will see, dialectological methodologies always involve compromises, no approach is ever flawless. Ultimately, a good number of difficult practical decisions have to be taken – how long can this research take, and what are the financial restrictions on the project? As we will see geographical dialectology is probably the most expensive and the most time consuming of all forms of language variation research.

Countering the urbanist agenda in variationist sociolinguistics: dialect contact, demographic change and the rural-urban dichotomy

In variational linguistics, the concept of space has always been a central issue. However, different research traditions considering space coexisted for a long time separately. Traditional dialectology focused primarily on the diatopic dimension of linguistic variation, whereas in sociolinguistic studies diastratic and diaphasic dimensions were considered. For a long time only very few linguistic investigations tried to combine both research traditions in a two-dimensional design – a desideratum which is meant to be compensated by the contributions of this volume. The articles present findings from empirical studies which take on these different concepts and examine how they relate to one another. Besides dialectological and sociolinguistic concepts also a lay perspective of linguistic space is considered, a paradigm that is often referred to as “folk dialectology”. Many of the studies in this volume make use of new computational possibilities of processing and cartographically representing large corpora of linguistic data. The empirical studies incorporate findings from different linguistic communities in Europe and pursue the objective to shed light on the inter-relationship between the different concepts of space and their relevance to variational linguistics.

Space, diffusion and mobility

Given its origins in traditional dialectology, and given advances in our understanding of the social embedding of language variation, it is paradoxical that space should be one of the categories that has received least attention of all in variationist sociolinguistics. Until recently, space has largely been treated as an empty stage on which sociolinguistic processes are enacted. It has been unexamined, untheorized, and its role in shaping and being shaped by variation and change untested. One function of this chapter, therefore, is to assert that space makes a difference, and to begin, in a very hesitant way, to map out what a geographically informed variation analysis might need to address. It also examines variationist interactions with the related concept of mobility. It might be reasonable to think that human geographers would provide some clues on how to proceed. As we will see, they have engaged in a great deal of soul searching about the goals of their discipline, its very existence as a separate field of enquiry, and the directions it should take. Indeed there are remarkable parallels between the recent history of human geographic thought, and interest in language variation across space. Although space has been undertheorized in variation studies, a number of researchers, from the traditional dialectologists through to those interested in the dialectology of mobility and contact, have, of course, been actively engaged in research on geographical variation and language use. Their work will be contextualized here to highlight both the parallels with theory-building in human geography, but also some of the criticisms of earlier approaches which have fed through to human geography, but remain largely unquestioned in variationist practice. The chapter therefore presents a brief theoretical background to space and mobility, before exemplifying these concepts in variationist research through an examination of, for example, the spatial diffusion of linguistic innovations, the spatial configuration of linguistic boundaries and initial steps to examine the consequences of mobility for variationist research.