The Dialectal Survey: A Critical Revision of Some Methodological Aspects

Abstract

The methodological aspects that characterize any dialectal survey were defined in Jules Gilliéron's Atlas Linguistique de la France (1902de la France ( -1910 and they were the starting point for later dialectal works. From then on, the number of informants interviewed, the qualities of the researcher or the typology of the questionnaire are characteristics that determine the design and the realization of any atlas. This paper examines different methodological aspects related to the dialectal survey and proposes a method that gives account of the progressive variation observed in the speakers of a cohesive dialectal territory.

On phonological variations in Kafrelsheikh Egyptian Arabic

“…As Aurrekoetxea & Perea (2009) maintain, interviewing more than one informant could help reveal further variation, as they might not provide identical answers to the same question. Socioeconomically, the informants represented a relatively homogeneous group of illiterate, immobile farmers who were likely to provide the most natural and regional speech, and be less subjected to the observer's paradox (Labov 1972).…”

Bariazio sinkronikoa aztertzeko metodologia(k)

“…Eta konturatu gabe hel gaitezke lekukoa nazkatzeraino, harentzat bat ere interesik ez duten gure galderekin, inoiz bortxatzeraino ere. Honen adibide bat baino gehiago bildu da dialektologian (Aurrekoetxea & Perea 2009).…”

Contraste de métodos y variación lingüística

“…Al igual que la variación ocurre en distintos niveles, los estudios también pueden ser de distinta índole. Así se diferencian los estudios de variación cualitativos y los estudios de variación cuantitativos (Aurrekoetxea, 1992(Aurrekoetxea, , 1995(Aurrekoetxea, , 2003(Aurrekoetxea, , 2004(Aurrekoetxea, , 2005(Aurrekoetxea, , 2008(Aurrekoetxea, , 2009(Aurrekoetxea, , 2016Aurrekoetxea & Ormaetxea, 2006;Gaminde, 2007;Iglesias, 2014;Ensunza, 2015;Lujanbio, 2016;Eguskiza, 2019;Etxebarria & Eguskiza, 2018;Gaminde et al, 2016aGaminde et al, , 2016bGaminde et al, , 2017. Suele ser el propio investigador el que se decanta por uno de ellos o decide emplear la combinación de ambos según el objetivo que pretenda alcanzar con la investigación.…”