language and space volume 1 errata

7/31/2019 Language and Space Volume 1 Errata

1/4

Language and SpaceLanguage and SpaceLanguage and SpaceLanguage and SpaceAn International Handbook of Linguistic Variation

Edited byEdited byEdited byEdited by Jrgen ErichJrgen ErichJrgen ErichJrgen Erich SchmidtSchmidtSchmidtSchmidt

Volume 1Volume 1Volume 1Volume 1

Theories and MethodsEdEdEdEditediteditedited bybybyby PeterPeterPeterPeter AuerAuerAuerAuer andandandand Jrgen ErichJrgen ErichJrgen ErichJrgen Erich SchmidtSchmidtSchmidtSchmidt

2010. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton. ISBN 978-3-11-018002-2

ErrataErrataErrataErrata

11. Language, space and the folk by Dennis Preston11. Language, space and the folk by Dennis Preston11. Language, space and the folk by Dennis Preston11. Language, space and the folk by Dennis Preston

The wrong map appeared on page 181 of the print edition (Map 11.1). Pleasefind the correct map on the following replacement pages.

17. Emergence of vari17. Emergence of vari17. Emergence of vari17. Emergence of varieeeetiestiestiesties through restructuring and reevaluationthrough restructuring and reevaluationthrough restructuring and reevaluationthrough restructuring and reevaluation by by by by

Alexandra LenzAlexandra LenzAlexandra LenzAlexandra Lenz

An incorrect figure appeared on page 298 of the print edition (Figure 17.2).Please find the correct version on the following pages.The errors have been rectified in the electronic edition of the handbook. Weapologize sincerely for this mistake.


2/4

11. Language, space and the folk 181

Map 11.1: The westernmost section of the North Brabant, showing production boundaries (dark

thick lines), little arrows of respondent similarity perceptions, and perceptual areas (gray thick lines)

(enlarged and adapted from Weijnen 1946)

In general, the principal motivation in this early Dutch research seemed to have been

a desire to give production dialect boundaries greater or lesser weight by establishing

their folk validity, combining folk and scientific notions of linguistic space. This is thor-

oughly discussed by Weijnen (1968) and is explicitly realized in Daan (1969) who, in an

ambitious study of contiguous Dutch-speaking areas, provides a map based on both

perception and production data. Kremer (1984) is another interesting little-arrow study

of the perception of varieties by German and Dutch speakers within and across national

boundaries. All these studies, however, make use of the technique of drawing perceptual

boundaries around areas not crossed by any little arrows, i. e., judgments of dialectsimilarity by folk respondents.


3/4

17. Emergence of varieties 297

less neglected. Attitudes are commonly conceptualized as beliefs and valuations that

according to the mentalistic concept of Allport (1954) are compounds of cognitive,

evaluative and conative elements (cf. Rosenberg and Hovland 1960; Hewstone, Man-

stead and Stroebe 1997). They are not innate, predefined and invariable constants, but

dynamic and processual features which emerge, further develop and vary in socially

interactive processes from sedimentations of individual and transferred experience (cf.

Deprez and Persoons 1987). Variety reevaluation processes, and the restructuring which

they imply, are subject to the general dynamics of attitudes. This includes all forms of

attitudinal dynamics, especially the ebb and flow of prestige. Linguistic and attitudinal

dynamics form a complex relational network from which new varieties can emerge,

which in turn can initiate and support new linguistic and attitudinal processes. Within

the history of European dialectstandard constellations, three primary patterns for the

emergence of varieties through reevaluation can be reconstructed:

Type A: Reevaluation of a vernacular variety as a high variety.

Type B: Reevaluation of a vernacular variety as a low variety.Type C: Reevaluation of a high variety as a low variety.

The first type of reevaluation process (Type A) is found in the case of a monocentric

selection and implementation of a standard variety which emerges from the growing

prestige of an existing variety, for example. This variety increasingly becomes an orienta-

tion norm for other diatopic varieties among which it originally existed as more or less

an equal. The reevaluation of a vernacular variety as a high variety is sketched in Figure

17.1. This depiction, like Figures 17.2, 17.3 and 17.7, draws on Auer 2005, but here the

aspect of (re)evaluation is emphasized. A more detailed discussion of this reevaluation

type follows in section 3.

Fig. 17.1: Reevaluation of a vernacular variety as a high variety (Type A: Emergence of a standard

variety via monocentric selection)

The concomitant reevaluation of the other vernacular varieties as dialects represents

an example of the second type of reevaluation process (Type B, see Figure 17.2). It is

only through the existence of their standard counterpart that dialects become a relational

and constitutive element of the dialectstandard constellation (see section 4).

Similarly, regiolects

which can be located on the vertical axis as middle varieties,above the dialects but below an overarching standard variety presuppose the


4/4

III. Structure and dynamics of a language space298

Fig. 17.2: Reevaluation of vernacular varieties as low varieties (Type B: Emergence of dialects, in

the sense of relational diasystems)

existence of both relational poles. In the research literature, the emergence of regiolects

is mostly explained as a complex interplay of vertical and horizontal convergence proc-

esses (cf. Bellmann 1983; Siebenhaar, this volume; Ryneland, this volume). Alongside

convergence processes which effect structural changes on the dialectstandard axis, re-

evaluation processes have to be taken into consideration in explaining the emergence of

regiolects. As can be illustrated by the test case of German (see section 5.3), intermediate

varieties may be identified as old high varieties, which are devalued as a result of the

superimposition of a new high variety and take on a modified position and function

within the variety spectrum (Type C, see Figure 17.3).

Fig. 17.3: Reevaluation of an erstwhile high variety as a low variety (Type C: Emergence of regio-

lects by superimposition)

In general, the evaluation and reevaluation of varieties presents a complex and highly

challenging object of research (cf. Auer, Hinskens and Kerswill 2005: 3839). Evidence

for a varietys changing prestige can be provided by so-called hyperforms, which are

(primarily) the result of a speakers inadequate approximation of an intended target

variety and which can in certain cases even attain system-internal status (see Herrgen

1986; Pargman 1998). In linguistic terms, hyperforms are motivated by a partial con-

trast between varieties, i. e., where no one-to-one correspondence between the varietiesin contact can be formulated. The generation of hyperforms can be explained as false

language and space volume 1 errata

Documents