Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.
To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to upgrade your browser.
The Chinese provinces are a crazy patchwork quilt of languages and dialects, where the histories of migrations and cultural enclaves, the tides of influence from empire and commerce, the sperm trails that follow rivers and railway lines ... are recorded in a tangle of codes that no one has yet made a serious attempt to untangle. Note that these comments are obviously informal, not a part of systematic research. Chinese scholars themselves are now (2013) taking a much more thorough interest in dialects than was the case even in 2000.
Studies in Honor of Jerry Norman, 2010
Jerry Norman is one of the world’s most widely acknowledged and respected experts on the Min dialects. Yet his crowning achievement in the field, his reconstruction of Proto-Min phonology, has not received widespread acceptance. Many scholars have argued that Norman’s reliance on the comparative method is misguided, and that in researching the history of peculiar features in Chinese dialects emphasis must be placed on uncovering the lexical layers resulting from dialect contact. Yet the opposition between a comparative-reconstructive approach and a lexical layering approach, which appears to lie at the heart of the disagreement, is not sufficient to account for the different conclusions of these scholars. I argue that a major reason lies instead in fundamental differences of opinion about data collection and interpretation, rather than in differences of methodology and analysis. Because these differences in underlying assumptions have for the most part not been explicitly addressed in the academic literature, it has not been possible to reconcile the two competing storylines about the history of the Min dialects. This study focuses in particular on Norman’s proposal for the reconstruction of a series of Proto-Min “softened” stop initials and on the data that appears to support or refute the proposal. Refutations by scholars like Hirata Shōji, Lǐ Rúlóng, and Wáng Fútáng appear to simply present alternative explanations for the same phenomena that Norman seeks to explain. In fact, however, the data sets on which these and other scholars’ work is based overlap only partially with the supporting data presented by Norman. It is only through a careful examination of how these data sets differ that the basic differences in assumptions, and the way they shape methodology, can be brought out into the open. By doing so, I hope to take a step toward providing a common framework that will allow competing hypotheses to stop “talking past each other” and instead to contribute to the development of a comprehensive natural history of Chinese dialects."
Chinese Language and Discourse, 2016
In the study of language learning, researchers sometimes ask how languages in contact are related. They compare the linguistic features of the languages, how the mental grammars of each language sub-system are represented, put to use in performance, and how they interact. Within a linguistic family, languages can be closely related or distantly related, an interesting factor, for example, in understanding bilingualism and second language development. Dialects, on the other hand, are considered to be variants of the same language. While there is no way to always draw a sharp line between the categories of language and dialect, it is necessary to distinguish between the two kinds of language variation by the application of uniform criteria. The distinction between dialect and language is important for designing bilingual instructional programs, both for students who already speak two languages and for beginning second language learners.
Proceedings of Methods XIV: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on Methods in Dialectology, 2011 (Bamberg Studies in English Linguistics 57), 236-248., 2014
In this essay I outline a mixed-methods approach to dialectology undertaken in a minority language context along the Honghe 红河 (Red River) valley just northwest of its Vietnam effluence in Yunnan Province, China (see Map 1). The varieties under consideration descend from an exclusive sub-branch of Southeastern Ngwi (Ngwi < Burmic < Tibeto-Burman) recently defined as “Riverine Phula” (Pelkey 2011). In summarizing my interpretive process and its results, I model a pattern-solving or “hermeneutic” mode of inquiry, useful for the explanation and definition of lectal boundaries and dialect continua in general. Although the essay is not intended to serve as a comprehensive theory (i.e., of a more radically integrative dialectology), it provides a small contribution toward that end.
2014
L'A. examine la langue chinoise parlee dans la province de Qinghai selon une perspective diachronique et une perspective synchronique. Il montre ensuite que les dialectes chinois de Qinghai ont ete fortement influences par les langues non-chinoises de la region et tente de determiner la maniere dont cette influence s'est exercee
Dialectology in the Qiang languages is still an underdeveloped field of study. Previous accounts of Qiang varieties have over simplistically described all varieties as belonging to one of two groups, Northern Qiang and Southern Qiang based on broad typological features. This article demonstrates that previous subgroupings are inadequate and cannot account for the diversity of Qiang varieties, such as the previously undescribed Yonghe variety. The implication of this finding is that an entirely new approach to subgrouping of Qiang varieties is required. This paper not only deconstructs the previous subgroupings, but also puts forward a new scheme for subgrouping based on shared innovations and individual-identifying evidence in order to show which groupings have been established and to show where further work is needed. Key Words: Tibeto-Burman, Qiang, dialectology, subgrouping methodology, statistical analysis
Two unpublished documents from a 2011 seminar on Chinese dialect phylogeny combined into a single pdf file; I am putting it online because the tree is occasionally being referred to in current literature on Chinese dialect classification. At the time, only the hand-drawn tree at the top was distributed to the audience. The accompanying text was meant as a canvas to aid in oral presentation, which explains its unpolished aspect. Exclusively cosmetic changes were made to the text, and the hand-drawn tree was added, immediately before putting it online on Academia. I am no longer certain that the evidence putting Waxiang and Caijia into a single branch is strong. Some lexical evidence for Wu being a bona fine group can now be cited. There still is no evidence that Gan is a valid group.
2019
Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2020
Cuadernos de Arqueología de la Universidad de Navarra, vol. 1, Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Navarra: 177-238, 1993
Revista Intertox de Toxicologia, Risco Ambiental e Sociedade, 2015
Transmission:The Journal of The Awareness Field, 2020
Revista de Estudos Empíricos em Direito, 2024
Revista da Rede de Enfermagem do Nordeste, 2014
New Journal of Chemistry, 2020
Proceedings of the IV International Symposium Adolescence(s) and II Education Forum, 2018
IEEE Communications Magazine, 2011