1 |
The ongoing challenge of connecting speakers to archival language records
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
2 |
Public access to research data in language documentation: Challenges and possible strategies
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
3 |
Daniel Macdonald and the 'compromise literary dialect' in Efate, central Vanuatu
|
|
|
|
In: Oceanic Linguistics (2015)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
4 |
Daniel Macdonald and the 'compromise literary dialect' in Efate, central Vanuatu
|
|
|
|
In: Oceanic Linguistics (2015)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
5 |
Keeping Track of Indigenous Language Endangerment in Australia
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.multilingual-matters.com/display.asp?K=9781853598678 (2015)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
6 |
Keeping Track of Indigenous Language Endangerment in Australia
|
|
|
|
In: http://www.multilingual-matters.com/display.asp?K=9781853598678 (2015)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
8 |
07 - Minipresentations on current citation practices in journals and subfields
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
9 |
The web of words and the web of life: Reconnecting language documentation with ethnobiology
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
10 |
The web of words and the web of life: Reconnecting language documentation with ethnobiology
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
14 |
Keeping records of language diversity in Melanesia: The Pacific and Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures (PARADISEC)
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
15 |
Mapping Endangered Records of Endangered Cultures ; Charting Vanishing Voices: A Collaborative Workshop to Map Endangered Oral Cultures
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
17 |
Keeping records of language diversity in Melanesia: The Pacific and Regional Archive for Digital Sources in Endangered Cultures (PARADISEC)
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
19 |
The Oxford handbook of linguistic fieldwork
|
|
|
|
MPI-SHH Linguistik
|
|
Show details
|
|
20 |
Sociolinguistic fieldwork
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
Sociolinguistic fieldwork is at the core of this article. It is challenging to provide an account of methods associated with sociolinguistic fieldwork, as the field of sociolinguistics is extremely heterogeneous. Researchers who identify as sociolinguists may be asking questions about the relationship between language and power. They may equally be interested in the functions of and structural constraints on switches between different languages or dialects in a polylectal speech community. Sociolinguists have always been heavily influenced by anthropology, not least in their methods, and this means that a lot of sociolinguistic research reports qualitative results, in addition to the quantitative results of the Labovian social dialect survey. This article reviews two of the dominant approaches in sociolinguistic fieldwork: the sociolinguistic interview and participant observation. This dichotomy is an idealization, but it is a useful heuristic around which to structure the article. Since many of the methodological issues that sociolinguists have to deal with in their fieldwork overlap with those of any other linguist, some of the technical and procedural aspects of sociolinguistic fieldwork are explained in the article. This article extensively explores the intersection between sociolinguistic fieldwork and ethnographic traditions in anthropology and sociology, especially the shared interests in documenting everyday and unmonitored speech as a window on speakers' ideologies about and attitudes to language, society, and their interlocutors.
|
|
Keyword:
dichotomy; ethnographic; Labovian social dialect survey; polylectal speech community; sociolinguistic fieldwork
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30097003
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|