Results (
Indonesian) 1:
[Copy]Copied!
A shorter version of sections 3 and 5-7 was presented as “Regionality as an independent variable” atMethods X, the Tenth International Conference on Methods in Dialectology, at Memorial University ofNewfoundland at St. John’s in August 1999. I benefited from comments by Joan Beal, Bill Kretzschmar,Luanne von Schneidemesser and Walt Wolfram at the conference, and have tried to incorporate them inthis fuller version. Edgar Schneider and my associates in the Dialect Topography project (in note 3) offeredhelpful criticisms of earlier drafts.1 I am beholden to Helvi Helena Virkamäki for what I know about Finnish dialectology.2 Von Schneidemesser (1979) devised a similar metric for a similar purpose in her survey of lexicalstability and change in Giessen, Germany. She classed her subjects in three categories of indigenousnesswhich she called A (equivalent to RI 1 in our terms), B (roughly RI 2-3) and C (roughly RI 4-7). Some ofher results are summarized in Barbour and Stevenson 1990: 108-09.3 Chambers and Heisler (1999) includes a detailed discussion of the sociolinguistic setting in Quebec Cityand the complex patterns of linguistic variation that are occurring there. This case study of bureau and thethird one (soft drink/pop) were first discussed there. I am grateful to Troy Heisler for his help in developingthem. This article substantively adds the statistical thresholds of the RI and the componential analysis of RIRegionality Chambers—22that follows from them in the final section. Christiane Richter de Poppe supplied information on the wordsfor carbonated drinks. I am also beholden to Gord Easson and Mary MacKeracher, research assistants inthe Dialect Topography project, for help with the analysis and interpretation.4 In Montreal, the other major city in the province of Quebec, the avoidance of pop as the interloper wordis more clearly marked. There, the list of preferences (counted as in Table 7) is: soft drink 61.3%, pop10.4%, soda 21.2%, sodapop 0.4%, cola 1.1%, coke 2.5%, and other brand names 2.9%. The Englishspeakingminority in Montreal is much larger and much less fragmented than in Quebec City, withproportionately fewer interlopers.
Being translated, please wait..
