DIALECTOLOGY

Language studies

Lecturer :
M.EKO ISDIANTO ,S.Pd,M.Hum

Arranged by
GROUP 4

SRI WAHYUNINGSIH (2183321028)

RADLYNA ADRI (2182121012)
ELIZABETH SIAHAAN (2181121018)
JOHANNES OLIBER HUTAGALUNG (2183321013)

ENGLISH EDUCATION 18 C
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
FACULTY OF LANGUAGE AND ART
STATE UNIVERSITY OF MEDAN
2019
 PREFACE

First of all, thanks to God because of the help of God , writer finished a working paper.
The purpose in this paper is to fulfill the assignment that given by Sir.M.Eko Isdianto,S.pd.,M.
Hum as lecturer in language studies major.

In arranging this paper, the writer truly get lots challenges and obstructions but with help
of many individuals, those obstructions could passed.

Writer also realized there are still many mistakes in process of writing this paper. Then
the writer hope the criticism and suggestions from the readers can help the writer in perfecting
the next paper.

Last but not the least hopefully, this paper can helps the readers to gain more knowledge
about language studies major.

Medan, May 9th 2019

Group 4

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE i

TABLE OF CONTENTS ii

CHAPTER I 1

INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Formulation 1
1.3 Objective Problem 1

CHAPTER II 2

DESCRIPTION 2

2.1 History of dialect 2

2.2 The definition of dialectology ………3

2.3 Commonly studied concepts in dialectology 6

2.4 The differences between dialect and language ………………………… 7

CHAPTER III 23

CONCLUSION 23

3.1 Conclusion 23

3.2 Suggestion 23

REFERENCES 24
 CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

A. Background
Linguistics is defined as "The scientific study of language and its structure, including the
study of grammar, syntax, and phonetics. Specific branches of linguistics include
sociolinguistics, dialectology. Dialectology is the scientific study of linguistic dialect, a sub-
field of sosiolinguistics. It studies variations in language based primarily on geographic
distribution and their assoiated features. Dialectology treats such topics as divergence of
two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation because in this world
there are different types of languages. From regions, tribes, and nations to customs
produce types, structures, and patterns that differ in terms of existing dialects. Because
variations and characteristics are unique and different in the structure of the language
both in vocabulary, particles, sentence patterns and etc. Dialectology are ultimately
concerned with grammatical, lexical and phonological features that to regional areas.
Thus they usually deal not only with populations that have lived in certain areas for
generations, but also with migrant groups that bring their languages to new areas.

B. Formulation of the problem

- Knowledge of Dialectology in general
- What types of species are contained in Dialectology
- Finding out the meaning and function of Dialectology

C. Purposes
The benefit of this research is to increase knowledge in dialectology which the author has
described. It is also expected that the results of this study can be useful and helpful for
the development of further learning.
 CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

2.1 History of dialect

In London, there were comments on the different dialects recorded in 12th century sources, and
a large number of dialect glossaries (focusing on vocabulary) were published in the 19th
century.[1] Philologists would also study dialects, as they preserved earlier forms of words.

The first comparative dialect study in Germany was The Dialects of Bavaria by Johann Andreas
Schmeller, which included a linguistic atlas .In 1876, George Wenker sent postal questionnaires
out over Northern Germany. These postal questionnaires contained a list of sentences written in
Standard German. These sentences were then transcribed into the local dialect, reflecting
dialectal differences. Many studies proceeded from this, and over the next century dialect studies
were carried out all over the world. Joseph Wright produced the six-volume English Dialect
Dictionary in 1905.

Traditional studies in Dialectology were generally aimed at producing dialect maps, whereby
imaginary lines were drawn over a map to indicate different dialect areas. The move away from
traditional methods of language study however caused linguists to become more concerned with
social factors. Dialectologists therefore began to study social, as well as regional variation.
The Linguistic Atlas of the United States (1930s) was amongst the first dialect studies to take
social factors into account.

Under the leadership of Harold Orton, the University of Leeds became a centre for the study of
English dialect, and set up an Institute of Dialect and Folk Life Studies. In the 1950s, the university
undertook the Survey of English Dialects, which covered all of England, some bordering areas of
Wales and the Isle of Man. In addition, the University undertook more than 100 dialect
monographs before the death of Harold Orton in 1975. The Institute closed in 1983 to
accommodate budget cuts for the University, but its dialectological studies are now part of a
special collection, the Leeds Archive of Vernacular Culture, in the University's Brotherton Library.

This shift in interest consequently saw the birth of Sociolinguistics, which is a mixture of
dialectology and social sciences. However, Graham Shorrocks has argued that there was always
a sociological element to dialectology, and that many of the conclusions of sociolinguists (e.g. the
relationships with gender, class and age) can be found in earlier work by traditional
dialectologists.
2.2 The definition of dialectology

Dialectology (from Greek διάλεκτος, dialektos, "talk, dialect"; and -λογία, -logia) is the scientific
study of linguistic dialect, a sub-field of sociolinguistics. It studies variations in language based
primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. Dialectology treats such topics
as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation.

Dialectologists are ultimately concerned with grammatical, lexical and phonological features that
correspond to regional areas. Thus they usually deal not only with populations that have lived in
certain areas for generations, but also with migrant groups that bring their languages to new
areas (see language contact).

The study of language in society is called sociolinguistics. The real basis for much of
sociolinguistics is that the differences in language among members of a speech community or
between different regions speaking different varieties of the same language are often meaningful
for society. Not everyone who speaks a given language speaks it in the same way. Actually, every
individual uses language in their own unique way. This is evident from an analysis of writers'
vocabulary usage, for example. It is possible to prove the authorship of an anonymous work
based on statistical studies of word usage. An individual's particular way of speaking is called
an idiolect. Language variants spoken by entire groups of people are referred to
as dialects. Some linguists use the term lect to describe any variant of a language (family lect,
village lect, etc.)

Dialectology is a branch of sociolinguistics that studies the systematic variants of a language. The
term dialect was first coined in 1577 from the Latin dialectus, way of speaking. Dialectal variation
is present in most language areas and often has important social implications. The earliest
recorded instance where dialectal information played a role in history appears in the Bible, in the
Book of Judges, verse 12:4-6: Then Gilead cut Ephraim off from the fords of the Jordan, and
whenever an Ephraimite fugitive said 'Let me cross', the men of Gilead asked him "Are you an
Ephraimite?" If he answered "No." they said "Then say shiboleth. He would say Sibboleth, since
he could not pronounce the word correctly. Thereupon they seized and slaughtered him by the
fords of the Jordan. Because of these lines, the word shibboleth, which in ancient Hebrew meant
either ear of grain or flowing stream, has come to mean a distinguishing mark or criterion.

2.3 Commonly studied concepts in dialectology

1. Mutual intelligibility
Some have attempted to distinguish dialects from languages by saying that dialects of the same
language are understandable to each other. The untenable nature of blunt application of this
criterion is demonstrated by the case of Italian and Spanish cited below. While native speakers
of the two may enjoy mutual understanding ranging from limited to considerable depending on
the topic of discussion and speakers' experience with linguistic variety, few people would want
to classify Italian and Spanish as dialects of the same language in any sense other than historical.
Spanish and Italian are similar and to varying extents mutually comprehensible,
but phonology, syntax, morphology, and lexicon are sufficiently distinct that the two cannot be
considered dialects of the same language (but of the common ancestor Latin).

2. Diglossia
Another problem occurs in the case of diglossia, used to describe a situation in which, in a given
society, there are two closely related languages, one of high prestige, which is generally used by
the government and in formal texts, and one of low prestige, which is usually the
spoken vernacular tongue. An example of this is Sanskrit, which was considered the proper way
to speak in northern India, but only accessible by the upper class, and Prakrit which was the
common (and informal or vernacular) speech at the time. Varying degrees of diglossia are still
common in many societies around the world.

3. Dialect continuum

Major dialect continua in Europe in the mid-20th century[9]

A dialect continuum is a network of dialects in which geographically adjacent dialects are

mutually comprehensible, but with comprehensibility steadily decreasing as distance between
the dialects increases. An example is the Dutch-German dialect continuum, a vast network of
dialects with two recognized literary standards. Although mutual intelligibility between
standard Dutch and standard German is very limited, a chain of dialects connects them. Due to
several centuries of influence by standard languages (especially in Northern Germany, where
even today the original dialects struggle to survive) there are now many breaks in intelligibility
between geographically adjacent dialects along the continuum, but in the past these breaks were
virtually nonexistent.

The Romance languages

Galician/Portuguese, Spanish, Sicilian, Catalan, Occitan/Provençal, French, Sardinian, Roma
nian, Romansh, Friulan, other Italian, French, and Ibero-Romance dialects, and others—form
another well-known continuum, with varying degrees of mutual intelligibility.
In both areas—the Germanic linguistic continuum, the Romance linguistic continuum—the
relational notion of the term dialect is often vastly misunderstood, and today gives rise to
considerable difficulties in implementation of European Union directives regarding support of
minority languages. Perhaps this is no more evident than in Italy, where still today some of the
population use their local language (dialetto 'dialect') as the primary means of communication at
home and, to varying lesser extent, the workplace. Difficulties arise due to terminological
confusion. The languages conventionally referred to as Italian dialects are Romance sister
languages of Italian, not variants of Italian, which are commonly and properly called italiano
regionale ('regional Italian'). The label Italian dialect as conventionally used is more geopolitical
in aptness of meaning rather than linguistic: Bolognese and Neapolitan, for example, are termed
Italian dialects, yet resemble each other less than do Italian and Spanish. Misunderstandings
ensue if "Italian dialect" is taken to mean 'dialect of Italian' rather than 'minority language spoken
on Italian soil', i.e. part of the network of the Romance linguistic continuum. The indigenous
Romance language of Venice, for example, is cognate with Italian, but quite distinct from the
national language in phonology, morphology, syntax, and lexicon, and in no way a derivative or
a variety of the national language. Venetian can be said to be an Italian dialect both
geographically and typologically, but it is not a dialect of Italian.

4. Pluricentrism
A pluricentric language is a single genetic language that has two or more standard forms. An
example is Hindustani, which encompasses two standard varieties, Urdu and Hindi. Another
example is Norwegian, with Bokmål having developed closely with Danish and Swedish,
and Nynorsk as a partly reconstructed language based on old dialects. Both are recognized as
official languages in Norway.[10]
In a sense, the set of dialects can be understood as being part of a single diasystem, an
abstraction that each dialect is part of. In generative phonology, the differences can be acquired
through rules. An example can be taken with Occitan (a cover term for a set of related varieties
 of Southern France) where 'cavaL' (from late Latin caballus, horse) is the diasystemic form for the
following realizations
 Languedocien dialect: caval [kaβal] (L > [l], sometimes velar, used concurrently with French
borrowed forms chival or chivau);
 Limousin dialect: chavau [tʃavau] (ca > cha and -L > -u);
 Provençal dialect: cavau [kavau] (-L > -u, used concurrently with French borrowed
forms chival or chivau);
 Gascon dialect: cavath [kawat] (final -L > [t], sometimes palatalized, and used concurrently with
French borrowed forms chibau)
 Auvergnat and Vivaro-alpine dialects: chaval [tʃaval] (same treatment of ca cluster as in Limousin
dialect)

This conceptual approach may be used in practical situations. For instance when such a diasystem
is identified, it can be used construct a diaphonemic orthography that emphasizes the
commonalities between the varieties. Such a goal may or may not fit with sociopolitical
preferences.

2.4 The differences between dialect and language

To study dialects we must first decide how to determine when two similar forms of a language
are merely dialects of the same language and when are they separate languages. The difference
between dialect and language is not clear-cut, but rather depends on at least three factors, which
often contradict one another.

1) The first criterion is purely linguistic, mutual intelligibility. Can the speakers of two
different language forms readily understand one another? If they cannot, then the two forms
would normally be considered separate languages--at least by linguists. Such is the case with
Dutch, German and English, which are not mutually intelligible, or are mutually intelligible only
to a small degree. There are at least 5000 forms of speech across the world that are as different
from one another as German is from English. These would normally be considered separate
languages. If language differences cause only minimal problems in communication, there is a
tendency to call the variants dialects of a single language: such is the case with British, Australian,
American English and the English of India--all dialects of English.

2) The second criterion is cultural, and takes into account the opinion of the speakers: do the
speakers themselves think of their form of language as a variety of a more standard form of
speech? Is there a neutral or standarized form of the language that speakers look to as the
norm. This is certainly true of the varieties of English spoken in the United States. Most anyone
speaking Southern English or Brooklynese would consider their language forms to be local
variants of American English; they would also recognize certain newscasters as speaking English
"without an accent." In fact, some people use the word dialect to mean "an accent," although
an accent is only the phonological aspect of a dialect; dialects also differ in grammar and
vocabulary. Most speakers of American English would also consider American English and the
English spoken in Britain--which subscribes to a slightly different standard--to be variants of a
single language. (There are differences in vocabulary, pronunciation, punctuation, etc. between
standard American English and British English.) On the other hand, the Germanic languages of
Scandinavia show a high degree of mutual intelligibility, but few if any Danes or Norwegians
would claim that their language is a substandard dialect of Swedish. Each language--Danish,
Norwegian, Swedish, Icelandic--has its own, separate literary standard, even though the language
forms themselves show a fairly high degree of mutually intelligible.

Most language forms that share a single literary standard are mutually intelligible. A few are
not. The several main dialects of Chinese are not at all mutually intelligible in their spoken
form. The best known, Mandarin Chinese and Cantonese are more different from one another
than German is from English. Yet all of them use a single standard written form. This is possible
because Chinese characters are based only very loosely on sound. Therefore, many Chinese
speakers consider their very divergent spoken forms to be variants of a single standard language,
unified by the use of written characters with shared meanings. In terms of spoken form, the so-
called "dialects" of Chinese could easily be considered separate languages; in the speakers' view,
they are dialects of the same language--at least as far as the written language is concerned.

3) A final criterion in differentiating language from dialect involves a language's political

status, a factor that is external to the form of the language and sometimes even at variance with
the culture of the speakers. Do the political authorities in a country consider two language forms
to be separate languages or dialects of a single language? Extremely different, non-mutually
intelligible language forms may be called dialects simply because they are spoken within a single
political entity and it behooves the rulers of that entity to consider them as such: this was the
case with Ukrainian and Russian in the days of the Russian Empire, where Ukrainian (called Little
Russian) was considered a substandard variety of Russian (called Great Russian). This could also
be said to be the case with the so-called dialects of Chinese in the People's Republic of China.

On the other hand, language forms that are quite mutually intelligible can be considered
separate languages also for purely political reasons. Such is the case with Serbian and Croatian
in the former Yugoslavia. Linguistically, these two language forms are more similar than the
English spoken in Texas and New York; linguists, in fact, usually called them both by the name
Serbo-Croatian. However, for entirely political reasons the Serbs and the Croats have
deliberately invented separate literary standards to render their language more divergent than
it really is. Furthermore, the Croats, being Catholics, use the Latin alphabet, while the Orthodox
Serbs use a version of Cyrillic. A similar situation pertains is other cases, notably Hindi/Urdu, and
Bengali/Assamese.

A somewhat different example of political language-making is to be found in the case of

Romanian. When the USSR took over the eastern province of Romania in 1945 at the close of
WW2, they declared that the local Moldavian dialect was a separate language. Although
Moldavian and other regional dialects of Romanian actually differ very little, the Soviets forced
the Moldavians to adopt the Cyrillic alphabet and add many Russian words to the
vocabulary. When Moldavia became independent in 1992, the Russians living there have started
a civil war to gain their own mini-state inside Moldavia; they justified their apprehension by
saying that Moldavians speak Romanian and sooner or later will rejoin Romania. So the definition
of dialect vs. language, unfortunately, can also vary for purely political considerations.

The best we can do in defining a dialect as something different from a language is to say the
following: If two language variants are mutually intelligible and subscribe to the same literary
standard, they are dialects of the same language rather than separate languages--provided, of
course, that there is no overriding political reason to think otherwise. And, if two language
variants are not mutually intelligible, they are different languages- unless there is some
overriding political or cultural reason to consider them the same language. One exasperated
linguist said that a language is simply a dialect with an army and navy. Thus, the difference
between dialect and language is partly linguistic and partly a matter of opinion based on extra-
linguistic considerations.

It could be argued that most languages spoken today were once simply dialects of another
language. When a single people migrates in separate directions and the resulting groups no
longer maintain close communication with one another, then dialects emerge and in time can
evolve into separate languages (cf. Indo-European). The same effect can be produced as a result
of political disintegration (cf. Latin after the fall of the Roman Empire).

When people are cut off from each other--either by geography, by ethnic separatism, or by
political separation-- which group tends to change the least and retain the older forms of a
language? It turns out that the language spoken by the group that is most isolated from the
mainstream tends to change the least (Appalachian English is most like 17th cent. English.
Portuguese of Brasil. Yiddish like 15th century German). A striking example among Indo-
European languages is Lithuanian and Latvian. Often, languages that are on the periphery of a
language area tend to retain old forms the longest. (Spanish and Rumanian are more conservative
than French and Italian).
 What factors speed up or hinder the formation of dialects? Since language naturally changes
all the time, a language spread out over a large territory or over a geographically diverse territory
such as a series of mountain valleys is prone to differentiate into dialects. Language unity can
still be maintained by a unified system of education, by the influence of the mass media, by the
social mixing that occurs within a highly mobile population. Common culture and political
institutions also tend to resist the emergence of new dialects.

Some languages are very homogenous, showing little dialectal variation. Political unity over
a wide area for a long period of time tends to minimize the formation of dialects. Russian is a
good example: there are only three dialectal areas over a vast territory. Other languages have
very many dialects, some of which are not mutually intelligible. These dialects are the result of
speech communities being isolated from one another over long periods of time. As a rule, the
less groups communicate, the more their language forms will diverge. A good example of this is
the Basques, who inhabit a tiny territory of northeast Spain. Since villages and regions are
separated by mountains, the Basques speak at least half a dozen very different dialects. In
ancient Greece each city state had its own dialect. German has so many dialects today because
of centuries of political disunity, during which time each province or town developed its own way
of speaking; the main division today is between High and Low German.

Because dialects very often emerge because of language spread and subsequent isolation,
they may often be described in terms of geography. In such cases linguists usually find a dialect
continuum. The difference between one areal dialect and another is often a gradual series of
changes, not an abrupt change in any one location. Cf. the gradual transition from High to Low
German. Instead of marking the boundaries of dialects on maps, linguists often mark the
distribution of various features with bars called isoglosses (Cf. the pronunciation of greasy [s] vs.
[z] south of Pennsylvania.) Main dialects tend to be separated by isogloss bundles, or
coincidences of isoglosses. (e.g., New York and New England vs. the rest of the country; or the
South vs. the rest of the country.)

In addition to geography, other factors may lead to dialectal change. One is ethnicity, the
cultural, religious and racial differences that separate groups of people. The dialect of an ethnic
group within a larger speech community is often marked by certain unique features. Often these
features derive from the influence of an earlier language spoken by the given ethnic group. Cf.,
the example of minorities in the former USSR who speak Russian.) Sometimes ethnic groups seek
to assimilate into the mainstream and an ethnic dialect disappears in a few generations
(Lithuanian speakers of Russian, who usually achieve near perfect Russian). Sometimes speakers
deliberately try to maintain themselves apart from the majority (Georgians and Estonians, who
deliberately speak Russian with as much accent as possible as a statement of their
nationalism) This process also is apparent among various ethnic groups in the United States
today. The lingo of American teenagers is another example of intentional and deliberate
language divergence.

Another factor in the development and perpetuation of dialects is social differentiation. In

England the upper classes speak different dialects than the lower classes. Usually, dialects
developed on the basis of several interacting factors. The classes of Britain, for example,
originate in large part from historical differences in ethnicity. Even today, by and large, Britain's
lower classes trace their ancestry to the original Celtic inhabitants of the British Isles who were
defeated by the Anglo-Saxons. Many upper class British families trace their ancestry back to the
Norman French who conquered England in 1066.

CHAPTER III

CLOSING
a. Conclusion

Dialectology is a linguistic subdiscipline that studies dialect and language boundaries in a

particular region. Dialectology is an interdisciplinary science between linguistics and geography.
Language variations are differences in forms found in a language. These differences include all
elements of language, namely phonology, morphology, lexicon, syntax, and semantics.

Dialectology studies are considered to be able to help offset the scarcity of human resources who
are interested in handling the diversity of languages, at least overcome the limitations of energy,
time, facilities, and funds. In addition, you can communicate directly with the local population so
that you get a general description of the variety of languages while observing the political,
economic, and local socio-cultural conditions, including information about the geographical
conditions where the discussion is spoken. Thus, the study of dialectology is very necessary to
overcome multilingual language conditions such as in Indonesia.

b. Suggestion

As a student it is very important for us to know the study of dialectology. Because dialectology
studies dialect and language boundaries in a particular region. If we can understand the dialect
variations, we will be able to communicate with many people while observing the political,
economic, and local socio-cultural conditions, including information about the conditions of the
geographical environment where they are spoken.

REFERENCES

Anderson, Peter M. 1987 . A Structural atlas of the English dialects . London : Croom Helm
Trudgill, Peter. 1995. Sociolinguistics : An introduction to language and society. London : Penguin
Books

Wolfram, Walt. 1991. Dialects and American English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ : Prentice Hall (to be
reissued by Basil Blackwell in 1998 as American English : Dialects and variation)