Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-wxk4p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T08:31:24.703Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Social network integration and language change in progress in a rural alpine village*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2008

Rosina L. Lippi-Green
Rosina L. Lippi-Green
Affiliation:
Germanic Languages & Literatures and the Program in Linguistics, The University of Michigan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The quantification of communication network integration can provide information valuable to the study of language change in very small rural communities. The adaptation of urban and communication network methodology for rural alpine social structures establishes a framework for the study of variation leading to change based on individual usage for the dialect of Grossdorf in Vorarlberg, Austria's western-most province. This approach is particularly relevant when study of aggregate group behavior has failed to yield results due to small sample size or group internal inconsistency. (Field methods, language networks, variation and change)

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Language in Society , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 1989 , pp. 213 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Bell, C., & Newby, H. (1971). Community studies: An introduction to the sociology of local community. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Besch, W. (ed.) (1981). Sprachverhalten in ländlichen Gemeinden. Volume 1: J. Hufschmidt, A. Kail-Holland, E. Klein, & K. J. Mattheier, Ans¨tze zur Theorie und Methode. Forschungsbericht Erp-Projekt. Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag.Google Scholar
Bigler, N. (1979). Mundartwandel im mittleren Aargau. Bern: Peter Lang Verlag.Google Scholar
Boissevain, J. (1974). Friends of friends: Networks, manipulators, and coalitions. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Champion, D. J. (1981). Basic statistics for social research. 2nd ed.New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cubiti, T. (1973). Network density among urban families. In Boissevain, J. & Mitchell, J. C. (eds.), Network analysis: Studies in human interaction. The Hague: Mouton. 67–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gal, S. (1979). Language shift: Social determinants of linguistic change in bilingual Austria. (Language, Thought, and Culture: Advances in the Study of Cognition.) New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Harrell, F. E. Jr., (1983). The logist procedure. In Joyner, S. P. (ed.), SUGI Supplemental Library User's Guide. Gary, N.C.: SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Holmquist, J. C. (1985). Social correlates of a linguistic variable: A study in a Spanish village. Language in Society 14: 191–203.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (ed.) (1980). Locating language in time and space. (Quantitative Analysis of Linguistic Structure, 1.) New York: Academic.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1981). Resolving the neogrammarian controversy. Language 57(2): 207–3O8.Google Scholar
Labov, W., Yaeger, M., & Steiner, R. (1972). A quantitative study of sound change in progress. 2 vols. Report on NSF Contract NSF-GS-3287. Philadelphia: U.S. Regional Survey.Google Scholar
Leabo, D. A. (1976). Basic statistics. 5th ed.Homewood, Ill.: Irwin.Google Scholar
Lipburger, J. (1927). Die Mundart des Bregenzerwaldes mit besonderer Berücksichtigung des Mittelwaldes. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University at Graz.Google Scholar
Lippi, R. (1987). Variation leading to change in rural Alemannic: The dialect of Grossdorf in Vorarlberg, Austria. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Princeton University.Google Scholar
Lippi, R. (in preparation). Subjective evaluation testing of the nonintellectual but intelligent: Field methods for the noncosmopolitan community.Google Scholar
Mattheier, K. J. (1979). Theorie des Dialekts. Bemerkungen zu einigen neueren Ver¨ffentlichungen im Bereich der allgemeinen und deutschen Dialektologie. Rheinische Vierteljahrsblätter 43: 369–84.Google Scholar
Mattheier, K. J. (1985). Ortloyalität als Steuerungsfaktor von Sprachgebrauch in örtlichen Sprachgemeinschaften. In Besch, W. & Mattheier, K. J. (eds.), Ortssprachenforschung: Beiträge zu einem Bonner Kolloquium. Berlin: Schmidt. 139–57.Google Scholar
Milroy, L. (1987). Language and social networks. (Language in Society, 2.) 2nd rev. ed.Baltimore: University Park Press.Google Scholar
Moulton, W. G. (1960). The short vowel systems of Northern Switzerland: A study in structural dialectology. Word 16(2): 155–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moulton, W. G. (1961). Lautwandel durch innere Kausalit¨t: die ostschweizerische Vokalspaltung. Zeitschrift für Mundartforschung 28: 227–51.Google Scholar
Romaine, S. (1982). What is a speech community? In Romaine, S. (ed.), Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities. London: Edward Arnold. 13–24.Google Scholar
Ruoff, R. (1972). Grundlagen und Methoden der Untersuchung gesprochener Sprache. (Idiomatica, 1.) T¨bingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Ruoff, R. (1981). Häufigkeitswörterbuch gesprochener Sprache. Gesondert nach Wortarten alphabetisch, r¨ckl¨ufig alphabetisch und nach Häufigkeit geordnet. (Idiomatica, 8.) Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thelander, M. (1982). A qualitative approach to quantitative data of speech variation. In S. Romaine (ed.), Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities. 65–83.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P. & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 95–188.Google Scholar