System for contrasting related languages or dialects
In the field of dialectology, a diasystem or polylectal grammar[a] is a linguistic analysis set up to encode or represent a range of related[b]varieties in a way that displays their structural differences.[1][2]
The term diasystem was coined by linguist and dialectologist Uriel Weinreich in a 1954 paper as part of an initiative in exploring how to extend advances in structuralistlinguistic theory to dialectology to explain linguistic variation across dialects. Weinreich's paper inspired research in the late 1950s to test the proposal. However, the investigations soon showed it to be generally untenable, at least under structuralist theory. With the advent of generative theory in the 1960s, researchers tried applying a generative approach in developing diasystemic explanations; this also fell short.[3][4]
According to some leading sociolinguists,[5] the diasystem idea for incorporating variation into linguistic theory has been superseded by William Labov's notion of the linguistic variable. As such, the concept has not been part of any substantial linguistic theory and the term has limited currency in linguistics.[citation needed]
Origin of the concept
Trubetzkoy (1931) first suggested comparing accents by their synchronic states, rather than by comparing their different historical developments.[6][7] He classified sound differences between dialects into three types:[8]
Phonological: the inventory phonemes and contextual restrictions, which may vary between dialects. For example, speakers of Castilian Spanish have the phonemes /θ/ and /s/, whereas Western Hemisphere dialects of Spanish have just the latter.[9]
Phonetic: how phonemes are realized phonetically. For example, most dialects of English have strongly aspirated/ptk/ in words like park, tool, and cat, but some Northern English accents do not feature such aspiration.[10]
Etymological distribution:[c] the distribution of phonemes among member words in an interdialectal lexical correspondence set. For example, most English varieties contrast /æ/ and /ɑː/, but some use the former in words like bath and grass and others use the latter.[14]
Despite Trubetzkoy's proposal, linguists continued to consider variation between varieties outside of the scope of inquiry of grammar construction; each variety, in their thinking, should only be studied on its own terms.
Inspired by Trubetzkoy, Weinreich (1954) proposed a synthesis of linguistic geography and descriptive linguistics by applying the structuralist concept of grammar to the description of regular correspondences between different varieties;[15] a resulting supergrammar, which he called a diasystem, would be consistent with the individual grammars of all the member dialects.[16] A diasystem is a higher order system and its component units of analysis would accordingly be abstractions of a higher order than the units of analysis of the individual systems. That is, just as the phones present within an individual variety are grouped together into abstract phonemes, the phonemes present within a group of varieties could be grouped together into even more abstract diaphonemes. Weinreich exemplified the diasystemic approach by a formulaic arrangement of phoneme correspondences in three dialects of Yiddish, focusing on the vowels but arguing that the principle could work for other aspects of language.
Although Weinreich did not elaborate the diasystemic approach, he did consider some theoretical pitfalls to be avoided. He recognized that phonemic mergers and splits with dissimilar results across dialects would pose a difficult challenge for the construction of a diasystem; he cautioned against positing a diasystem when the work of creating all the member systems (e.g. the work of phonemicization) was yet incomplete; and, following the lead of Trubetzkoy (1931), he noted that the differences in phonological inventory and etymological distribution might prove problematic in the construction of diasystems.
Subsequent investigation
A few linguists[17] took up Weinreich's challenge[18][d] and quickly found it to be inadequate.[19] Some of the failures had been anticipated by Weinreich himself, as described above.
Moulton (1960) found an extreme example of divergent incidence in a study of two dialects of Swiss German, Luzerner and Appenzeller, which evolved independently of each other. Although each dialect had the same set of eleven short vowel phonemes, only one pair (/i/ ~ /i/) was shown to have a common parent vowel in earlier stages of German. The remaining phonetic similarities between the Luzerner and Appenzeller phoneme sets were fortuitous results of multiple mergers and splits that each dialect underwent separately.[20]
Pulgram (1964), examining Cochrane (1959) and Moulton (1960), noted the need for refinements in the original proposal; different researchers did not seem to agree on definitions, disciplines of study, or objects of inquiry.[21] The research and debate concluded that multiple dialects could not be described by a common grammar, at least not under structuralist theory. That is, it would be unfeasible to construct a single grammar for multiple dialects unless their differences were very minor or if it incorporated only a small number of dialects.
Related to Weinreich's proposal were efforts in both American dialectology and generative phonology to construct an "overall system" that represented the underlying representation for all dialects of English.[22][23]
Six of the nine simple vowels in this diasystem are common across most dialects: /i/ occurs in pit, /e/ in pet, /æ/ in pat, /ə/ in putt, /u/ in put, and /a/ in pot. The other three are found in specific dialects or dialect groups: /o/ represents the vowel of road in New England varieties; /ɨ/ represents a vowel that often appears in stressed syllables in words like just (when it means 'only'); and /ɔ/ represents the vowel of pot in Southern British and New England dialects.[28]
These nine simple vowels can then be combined with any of three offglides (/jhw/[29]) to make 36 possible complex nuclei. This system was popular amongst American linguists (despite criticism, particularly from Hans Kurath[30]) until Sledd (1966) demonstrated its inadequacy.[31]
The most salient criticism of these broad diasystems was the issue of how cognitively real they are. That is, whether speakers actually have competence in using or understanding the grammatical nuances of multiple varieties. In certain sociolinguistic circumstances, speakers' linguistic repertoire contains multiple varieties.[32] For example, Cadora (1970:15) argues that Modern Literary Arabic is a diasystem of various interference phenomena occurring when speakers of different Arabic varieties attempt to speak or read Literary Arabic.
More concretely, Peter Trudgill put forth what he considered to be a cognitively real[33] diasystem in Trudgill (1974), a book-length sociolinguistic study of Norwich. As a critic of Weinreich's original proposal, he approached the concept as a generativist, putting forth a series of rules that could generate any possible output reflected in the diversity and variability of sociologically conditioned linguistic variables.[34] Because most speakers of Norwich could vary their pronunciation of each variable depending on the circumstances in which they are speaking, the diasystem's rules reflected speakers' actual linguistic abilities.
Cognitively real diasystems are not limited to humans. For example, crows are able to distinguish between different calls that prompt others to disperse, assemble, or rescue; these calls show regional variation so that French crows do not understand recorded American calls. Although captive birds show difficulty understanding the calls of birds from nearby regions, those allowed to migrate are able to understand calls from both, suggesting that they have mentally constructed a diasystem that enables them to understand both call systems.[35]
Still, these sorts of "idiosyncratic" grammars differ in degree from broader diasystems, which are much less likely to be part of speakers' linguistic competence.[36] Even Trudgill has argued against their cognitive reality, deeming the concept of a broad diasystem to be a "theoretical dead-end."[37][38] Although the concept did not withstand scrutiny by research linguists, it nevertheless triggered a surge of academic work that used it in applied linguistics (e.g. for ESL education materials, composition texts for native speakers, basic linguistics texts, and in the application of linguistics to literary criticism).[39] Diasystemic representations are also possible in dictionaries. For example, the Macquarie Dictionary reflects the pronunciation of four phonetically distinct sociolects of Australian English. Because these sociolects are the same phonemically, readers (at least, those from Australia) can interpret the system as representing their own accent.[40]
↑ Although referentially synonymous, each term can carry different theoretical assumptions; Wolfram (1982:3) also lists overall pattern
↑ Some scholars use "related" in a far broader sense than others. For example, De Schutter (2010:73) applies diasystem to "the complete set of varieties (diachronic as well as diatopic-synchronic) supposed to derive from one ancestor."
↑ Starting with Kurath, other scholars have used the term incidence for this.[11][12][13]
↑ Weinreich argued that Trager & Smith (1951) fell short in constructing an accurate diasystem because the relevant component phonemic systems had not been established yet.[25] Similarly, Stockwell (1959:265–6), argues that their analysis is not truly diaphonemic because it includes oppositions without considering the effects of phonetic context.
↑ For extensive theoretical discussion of the implications of Cochrane and Moulton on the original diasystem idea, see Pulgram (1964), and Francis (1983).
Allen, Harold B. (1977), "Regional dialects, 1945-1974", American Speech, 52 (3/4): 163–261, doi:10.2307/455241, JSTOR455241
Auer, Peter; Di Luzio, Aldo (1988), "Introduction. Variation and convergence as a topic in dialectology and sociolinguistics", in Auer, Peter; Di Luzio, Aldo (eds.), Variation and convergence: studies in social dialectology, Sociolinguistics and language contact, vol.4, pp.1–10
Bailey, Charles-James N. (1972), "The integration of linguistic theory: Internal reconstruction and the comparative method in descriptive analysis", in Stockwell, Robert P.; Macaulay, Ronald K.S. (eds.), Linguistic Change and Generative Theory, Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp.22–31
Ballard, W.L. (1971), "Review: Linguistic change and the Saussurian paradox", American Speech, 46 (3/4): 254–270, doi:10.2307/3087780, JSTOR3087780
De Schutter, Georges (2010), "Dialectology", in Fried, Mirjam; Östman, Jan-Ola; Verscheuren, Jef (eds.), Variation and change: pragmatic perspectives, Handbook of pragmatics highlights, vol.6, John Benjamins, pp.73–80
Francis, Winthrop Nelson (1983). Dialectology: an introduction. Longman linguistics library. Vol.29. Longman.
Martínez-Celdrán, Eugenio; Fernández-Planas, Ana Ma.; Carrera-Sabaté, Josefina (2003), "Castilian Spanish", Journal of the International Phonetic Association, 33 (2): 255–259, doi:10.1017/S0025100303001373
McDavid, Raven Jr. (1952). "[untitled review of The Phoneme: Its Nature and Use by Daniel Jones]". Language. 28 (3): 377–386. doi:10.2307/410108. JSTOR410108.
Petyt, K. M. (1980). The study of dialect: an introduction to dialectology. The language library. London: A. Deutsch..
Trager, George L.; Smith, Henry L Jr. (1951). "An outline of English structure". Studies in Linguistics occasional papers. 3. Norman, OK: Battenberg Press.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
Trask, Robert L. (1996). A Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. London: Routledge.
Trubetzkoy, Nikolai (1931), "Phonologie et géographie linguistique", Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, 4: 228–234
Trudgill, Peter (1974). The social differentiation of English in Norwich. Cambridge studies in linguistics. Vol.13. Cambridge University Press.
Trudgill, Peter (1983), On Dialect: Social and Geographical Perspectives, New York: New York University Press
Wells, John Christopher (1982), Accents of English: An Introduction, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Whorf, Benjamin Lee (1943), "Phonemic analysis of the English of Eastern Massachusetts", SIL, 2: 1–40
Wolfram, Walt (1982), "Language knowledge and other dialects", American Speech, 57 (1): 3–18, doi:10.2307/455176, JSTOR455176
Further reading
Bailey, Charles-James N. (1973). Variation and Linguistic Theory. Washington, D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Bickerton, Derek (1976). Dynamics of a Creole System. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Clouthiade, Marcel (1997). "Quelques aspects du diasystème phonologique de la langue rromani". Faits de Langues. 5 (10): 113–120. doi:10.3406/flang.1997.1175.
Francescato, Giuseppe (1965a). "Structural comparison, diasystems, and dialectology". Zeitschrift für romanische philologie. 81: 484–491.
Francescato, Giuseppe (1965b). "Struttura linguistica e dialetto". In Straka, G. (ed.). Actes du Xe congrès international de linguistique et philologie. Paris: Klincksieck. pp.1011–1017.
Moulton, William G. (1968). "Structural dialectology". Language. 44 (3): 451–466. doi:10.2307/411713. JSTOR411713.
Weinreich, Uriel; Labov, William; Herzog, Marvin (1968). "Empirical foundations for a theory of language change". In Lehmann, Winfred P.; Malkiel, Yakov (eds.). Directions for historical linguistics: a symposium. University of Texas Press. pp.97–195. Archived from the original on 2012-01-18.
Related Research Articles
In phonology, minimal pairs are pairs of words or phrases in a particular language, spoken or signed, that differ in only one phonological element, such as a phoneme, toneme or chroneme, and have distinct meanings. They are used to demonstrate that two phones represent two separate phonemes in the language.
Morphophonology is the branch of linguistics that studies the interaction between morphological and phonological or phonetic processes. Its chief focus is the sound changes that take place in morphemes when they combine to form words.
A phoneme is any set of similar speech sounds that is perceptually regarded by the speakers of a language as a single basic sound—a smallest possible phonetic unit—that helps distinguish one word from another. All languages contain phonemes, and all spoken languages include both consonant and vowel phonemes. Phonemes are primarily studied under the branch of linguistics known as phonology.
Phonology is the branch of linguistics that studies how languages systematically organize their phonemes or, for sign languages, their constituent parts of signs. The term can also refer specifically to the sound or sign system of a particular language variety. At one time, the study of phonology related only to the study of the systems of phonemes in spoken languages, but now it may relate to any linguistic analysis either:
In phonetics, palatalization or palatization is a way of pronouncing a consonant in which part of the tongue is moved close to the hard palate. Consonants pronounced this way are said to be palatalized and are transcribed in the International Phonetic Alphabet by affixing the letter ⟨ʲ⟩ to the base consonant. Palatalization is not phonemic in English, but it is in Slavic languages such as Russian and Ukrainian, Finnic languages such as Estonian and Võro, Irish, Marshallese, Kashmiri, and Japanese.
Marshallese, also known as Ebon, is a Micronesian language spoken in the Marshall Islands. The language of the Marshallese people, it is spoken by nearly all of the country's population of 59,000, making it the principal language. There are also roughly 27,000 Marshallese citizens residing in the United States, nearly all of whom speak Marshallese, as well as residents in other countries such as Nauru and Kiribati.
Keres, also Keresan, is a Native American language, spoken by the Keres Pueblo people in New Mexico. Depending on the analysis, Keres is considered a small language family or a language isolate with several dialects. If it is considered a language isolate, it would be the most widely spoken language isolate within the borders of the United States. The varieties of each of the seven Keres pueblos are mutually intelligible with its closest neighbors. There are significant differences between the Western and Eastern groups, which are sometimes counted as separate languages.
Linking R and intrusive R are sandhi phenomena where a rhotic consonant is pronounced between two consecutive vowels with the purpose of avoiding a hiatus, that would otherwise occur in the expressions, such as tuner amp, although in isolation tuner is pronounced the same as tuna in non-rhotic varieties of English. These phenomena occur in many of these dialects, such as those in most of England and Wales, parts of the United States, and all of the Anglophone societies of the southern hemisphere, with the exception of South Africa. In these varieties, the sound is pronounced only when it is immediately followed by a vowel.
Glottalization is the complete or partial closure of the glottis during the articulation of another sound. Glottalization of vowels and other sonorants is most often realized as creaky voice. Glottalization of obstruent consonants usually involves complete closure of the glottis; another way to describe this phenomenon is to say that a glottal stop is made simultaneously with another consonant. In certain cases, the glottal stop can even wholly replace the voiceless consonant. The term 'glottalized' is also used for ejective and implosive consonants; see glottalic consonant for examples.
Numic is the northernmost branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family. It includes seven languages spoken by Native American peoples traditionally living in the Great Basin, Colorado River basin, Snake River basin, and southern Great Plains. The word Numic comes from the cognate word in all Numic languages for “person”, which reconstructs to Proto-Numic as. For example, in the three Central Numic languages and the two Western Numic languages it is. In Kawaiisu it is and in Colorado River, and.
Tukang Besi is an Austronesian language spoken in the Tukangbesi Islands in southeast Sulawesi in Indonesia by a quarter million speakers. A Tukang Besi pidgin is used in the area.
Dialectology is the scientific study of dialects: subsets of languages. Though in the 19th century a branch of historical linguistics, dialectology is often now considered a sub-field of, or subsumed by, sociolinguistics. It studies variations in language based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. Dialectology deals with such topics as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation.
Lexical diffusion is the hypothesis that a sound change is an abrupt change that spreads gradually across the words in a language to which it is applicable. It contrasts with the Neogrammarian view that a sound change results from phonetically-conditioned articulatory drift acting uniformly on all applicable words, which implies that sound changes are regular, with exceptions attributed to analogy and dialect borrowing.
The Scottish vowel length rule describes how vowel length in Scots, Scottish English, and, to some extent, Ulster English and Geordie is conditioned by the phonetic environment of the target vowel. Primarily, the rule is that certain vowels are phonetically long in the following environments:
A diaphoneme is an abstract phonological unit that identifies a correspondence between related sounds of two or more varieties of a language. For example, some English varieties contrast the vowel of late with that of wait or eight. Other English varieties contrast the vowel of late or wait with that of eight. This non-overlapping pair of phonemes from two different varieties can be reconciled by positing three different diaphonemes: A first diaphoneme for words like late, a second diaphoneme for words like wait, and a third diaphoneme for words like eight.
The Hangzhou dialect is spoken in the city of Hangzhou, China and its immediate suburbs, but excluding areas further away from Hangzhou such as Xiāoshān (蕭山) and Yúháng (余杭). Its number of speakers has been estimated to be about 1.2 to 1.5 million. It is a dialect of Wu, one of the Chinese varieties.
Variation is a characteristic of language: there is more than one way of saying the same thing in a given language. Variation can exist in domains such as pronunciation, lexicon, grammar, and other features. Different communities or individuals speaking the same language may differ from each other in their choices of which of the available linguistic features to use, and how often, and the same speaker may make different choices on different occasions.
This article discusses the phonological system of the Bulgarian language.
Lenakel, or West Tanna, is a dialect chain spoken on the western coast of Tanna Island in Vanuatu.
Distributionalism was a general theory of language and a discovery procedure for establishing elements and structures of language based on observed usage. The purpose of distributionalism was to provide a scientific basis for syntax as independent of meaning. Zellig Harris defined 'distribution' as follows.
“The DISTRIBUTION of an element is the total of all environments in which it occurs, i.e. the sum of all the (different) positions of an element relative to the occurrence of other elements[.]”
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
