| 1 |
Repeated undersampling in PrInDT (RePrInDT): Variation in undersampling and prediction, and ranking of predictors in ensembles ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 2 |
Combining Prediction and Interpretation in Decision Trees (PrInDT) -- a Linguistic Example ...
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 4 |
The interaction between identity preservation and linguistic integration of immigrants: the case study of Eritreans in Switzerland
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 6 |
Sociolinguistic identity (re)construction in the German diaspora: the case of the use of address forms and kinship terms by Anglophone Cameroonian immigrants
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 8 |
The evolution of Englishes : the dynamic model and beyond ; [Festschrift for Edgar Schneider on the occasion of his 60th birthday]
|
|
|
|
BLLDB
|
|
UB Frankfurt Linguistik
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 9 |
The evolution of Englishes : the dynamic model and beyond ; [Festschrift for Edgar Schneider on the occasion of his 60th birthday.]
|
|
|
|
IDS Mannheim
|
|
Show details
|
|
|
| 10 |
Emergence of “new varieties” in speech as a complex system
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
The scale of modern dialect studies has been driven down over recent decades, from large regional and urban dialects to the speech of much smaller populations. Belfast social networks came from about a dozen people in each of three neighborhoods (Milroy 1980). Eckert's core groups of Jocks and Burnouts inside a high school (2000) consisted of clusters of about half a dozen students. Childs has written about two communities of practice in North Carolina, each with only four speakers (2005). The locus for dialects, then, the population of the speech community in which we expect to find some characteristic variety of speech, has fallen in size from millions of speakers to thousands to dozens to the single digits. This trend in scholarship matches predictions for the spontaneous emergence of order when speech is considered as a complex system. Kretzschmar 2009 shows that speech (parole, as distinguished from linguistic structures as discussed in structuralist or generative models) has five properties characteristic of complex systems: speech is open and dynamic, as opposed to a static structure; speech includes a very large number of interactive components/agents, as opposed to a hierarchical arrangement of types; speech shows emergent order, as opposed to rule-bound relations; the distribution of units in speech is non-linear, as opposed to an assumption of random use of words or normal distribution of features; and speech has the property of scaling, as opposed to an assumption of homogenous unity. These properties engage nicely with the framework for “new varieties” of English suggested by Edgar Schneider (2007), which highlight perceptual qualities and describe the progress of emergence of postcolonial varieties from early settlement to mature nation states. Complex systems also engages with varieties such as those described in social network and community of practice studies, in relation to larger generalizations about urban, regional, or national dialects. Application of ideas from complexity science shows that we need not abandon large generalizations like Schneider's for smaller ones like those of Milroy, Eckert, and Childs, or vice versa, so long as we consider that variation in English has the property of scaling that begins in small groups that form the basis for broad and interacting regional and social continua of speech.
|
|
Keyword:
P Philology. Linguistics
|
|
URL: https://benjamins.com/#catalog/books/veaw.g49/main
http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/130573/
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
|
|
|
