Eric S. Wheeler

Finnish dialect atlas for quantitative studies

Abstract Before we can do quantitative studies of large volumes of dialect material (such as Embleton & Wheeler, 1996, on English), it is necessary to have machine‐readable sources of data. For Finnish dialects, the principal source of data is an out‐of‐print dialect atlas (Kettunen, 1940), which we are now putting into machine‐readable form. To ease the chore of data entry, we have developed custom‐made PC‐based programs. Through a process of redundant data entry, we plan to minimize keying errors, and produce a statistically sound estimate of the number of remaining errors. Other issues we consider include: translation of the elaborate typography, generality of the data formats, intellectual property rights, and availability of original data sources. We hope that this work will provide a base not only for our work but also for other quantitative studies and computer‐based applications of this body of data.

Computerized Dialect Atlas of Finnish: Dealing with Ambiguity

To enable quantitative studies of large volumes of data, it is often appropriate to create machine-readable forms of existing printed works. We have undertaken such a project (Embleton & Wheeler, 1997) for Finnish using an important, but out-of-print, dialect atlas (Kettunen, 1940), and have reached a stage where the primary data entry has been completed. Next, we need to confirm the accuracy of the data entry in a way that is both efficient for us and still convincing to a potential user of the data or other outside party. We describe our testing protocol, testing tools and the practical concerns of selecting appropriate sample sizes for statistically-based tests. A critical issue, however, is the inherent ambiguity in the data itself. Because the original dialect atlas used typographic conventions for marking dialect areas, the delineation of these areas has a different precision than the digital form. For example, Village A may be on the edge of an area marked with X’s, and on the edge of an area marked by O’s, but not definitely inside or outside either or both areas. For the atlas reader, the marginal relationship of the village to each of the two dialect features is obvious. However, in digitizing the map (with the categories we have chosen), it is necessary to assign the village to ‘X’ or ‘not X’, and to ‘O’ or ‘not O’. We outline our approach to resolving these issues for Finnish. However, we note that the problem is much more general, and needs to be considered in the design of any such conversion of data for quantitative study.

Defining dialect regions with interpretations: Advancing the multidimensional scaling approach

Methodologically, we have switched from looking at raw data to examining interpretative maps based on recognized dialect distinctions. Further, we have categorized these interpretations as phonetic (regular and irregular), morphophonemic, morphological, and lexical, examining each category separately. The result is a much clearer set of dialect distinctions, as seen in the MDS pictures. However, the dialect distinctions vary by category, leading us to make suggestions about the role of each category in defining the notion of dialect.

An Exploration into the Management of High Volumes of Complex Knowledge in the Social Sciences and Humanities

Dialectology provides a good test-bed for dealing with the problems (found widely in the social sciences and humanities) of high volumes of complex data. In the Romanian Online Dialect Atlas project, we undertake to capture an extensive dataset online, present the data in ways that are useful to a wide range of researchers, and apply an innovative technique to the data (using the statistical technique called multidimensional scaling). The Romanian data is important both for Romanian and Romance linguistics, and for what it demonstrates about dialectology in general.

A framework for studying languages in contact: a prolegomenon to a theory

Both lay people and linguists use the concept of ‘languages in contact’ in a broad range of different, albeit related, ways. When William, Duke of Normandy, invades England in 1066, he and his followers come speaking Norman French with a profound impact on English. But when 8-year old Christopher moves from Canada to England, his ‘accent’ changes in response to what he now hears around him. In between these two extremes are situations that can all be called language contact. To make sense of the spectrum of language contact, we outline some major dimensions of that concept, and propose positioning research according to how the descriptions and explanations (if any) in the research treat these dimensions. To do this, we model language contact using the idea that language is the (linguistic) behavior of a community whose members communicate with one another. Then, we consider the different ways that contact between such communities can happen, and so develop a scheme for categorizing language contact. We look at some descriptions of language in contact and consider whether they are wholly descriptive, or include an explanation; if explanatory, how does the explanation relate to our model of language as community behavior.

Defining User Access to the Romanian Online Dialect Atlas

Abstract The Romanian Online Dialect Atlas (RODA) provides a digitized version of an extensive hard-copy atlas of the Crişana region of Romania (Stan & Uritescu, Noul Atlas lingvistic român. Crişana Vol. I, 1996, Stan & Uritescu, Noul Atlas lingvistic român. Crişana Vol. II, 2003). The set of tools we are now developing permits us to access data on a range of questions that would have been difficult to answer otherwise, and to visualize the results with dynamically generated maps.