Kontra, Miklós and Anna Borbély, eds. 2021. Tanulmányok a budapesti beszédről - a Budapesti Szociolingvisztikai Interjú alapján ('Studies on Budapest speech based on the Budapest Sociolinguistic Interview'). Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Phonology of Hungarian (The Phonology of the World's Languages) - Péter Siptár, Miklós Törkenczy
The Phonology of Hungarian (The Phonology of the World's Languages) - Péter Siptár, Miklós Törkenczy
First of all, it is our pleasure to acknowledge our indebtedness to our colleagues László Kálmán, Ádám Nádasdy, and László Varga, with whom we co-authored another book (Ferenc Kiefer (ed.), Strukturális magyar nyelvtan, 2. kötet: Fonológia [The Structure of Hungarian, Volume 2: Phonology], Akadémiai Kiadó, 1994) without which this volume could never have been written. Special thanks are due to Ferenc Kiefer for having initiated the project the end product of which is the present book. We would also like to thank Anna Kürti, Catherine Ringen, and Péter Szigetvári for their careful reading of and valuable comments on various versions of the manuscript. The discussions of various aspects of Hungarian phonology with László Kálmán, Ádám Nádasdy, Krisztina Polgárdi, Péter Rebrus, and Péter Szigetvári were invaluable and often drove us to despair. We owe a lot to our students, especially Zsuzsa Bárkányi, Zoltán Kiss, Anna Kürti, and Nóra Wenszky, who had to suffer several trial runs of various chapters of the manuscript and whose comments improved this book considerably. We would also like to thank Jacques Durand for valuable comments and for the editing of this series. We thank the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences for supporting the project between September 1996 and December 1996 (Zsigmond Telegdi Grant) and the Hungarian Soros Foundation for the Short Study Grant awarded to us in 1998. We are grateful to the Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics, University of Leiden, and Harry van der Hulst in particular for the hospitality, help, and the 'atmosphere of intellectual freedom' that surrounded us during the time we spent at HIL working on the final chapters of the book.
Hungarian Sociolinguistics in the Carpathian Basin, 1985–2022
Hungarian Studies Yearbook
Until about 1985, apart from traditional dialectological research, the study of Hungarian in Hungary focused mostly on the Codified Standard Hungarian variety, whose speakers are powerful in social but not in numerical terms. Sociolinguistic research since 1985 has now resulted in a program which embraces not only the 10 million (largely monolingual) Hungarians in Hungary proper, but also the 3 million bi- or multilingual minority Hungarians in the seven neighboring countries (kin-states). This program was initiated by researchers of the Department of Sociolinguistics in the Linguistics Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. This paper offers linguists who do not read Hungarian an overview of this research carried out between 1985 and 2022.
Phonology and Sociolinguistics
The Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics, 2013
Since the 1960s, there has been a transition in the target of linguistic description, from intuitive representations of the "ideal speaker/listener" to naturalistic data whose gradience is quantified. The transition is captured by Pierrehumbert: [L]anguage exhibits variability at all levels of representation, from phonetics to phonology and syntax, right through to pragmatics. Thus the issue is how variation fits into our scientific understanding of language. . . . [V]ariation penetrates further into the core of the theory than generally supposed, and that variation should be exploited rather than disregarded in investigating language. (1994: 233-234) Related to this are changing views in how human memory, and cognition more generally, work. The present chapter surveys effects of these two developments on the fields of phonology and sociolinguistics, focusing on examples that bring their domains closer. We see resulting developments in more accurate descriptions and robust theoretical models. This chapter reviews instances in which data organized by variationists have served to further develop Lexical Phonology (LP), Optimality Theory (OT), and Exemplar Theory (ET). This transition requires reexamining certain fundamental assumptions of traditional models of generative phonology. We will consider ways in which these developments have influenced sociolinguistic research design and interpretation, particularly regarding which gradient aspects are relevant to social perception and categorization. One goal of this chapter is to provide the groundwork for a unified linguistic model to be developed by collaboration across sociolinguistics, phonology, and other fields. This will allow us to better understand 625 language within the broader context of cognition, to take into account linguistic and nonlinguistic factors in an integrated fashion, and to develop formal models of observed patterns.
2014
This volume collects seven papers in contemporary sociophonetic research. It addresses hot themes in sociophonetics and proposes a fresh look at old problems still open to debate. A variety of approaches is proposed without neglecting the need for a coherent discussion of the nature of variation in speech and how speakers develop a cognitive representation of it. These characteristics distinguish the present volume from the panorama of comparable sociophonetic literature, which mainly consists of textbooks, readers, and journal special issues (as well as individual journal articles, conference proceedings, and informal reports). , contemporary sociophonetics and sociophonology differ from early variationist sociolinguistics for their focus on the cognitive representation of phonetic variation in the mind of the individual. Stated differently, the fundamental purpose of sociophonetic studies should be that of analyzing how the concrete communicative experiences are categorized by the speakers and, most importantly, of establishing the function of such complex nucleus of information in the structuring of linguistic systems. The fusion of sociolinguistics and phonetics occurs therefore within a cognitivist perspective in which the probabilistic nature of the language and the interest for the processes of language use and comprehension play a special role.
Dialect Typology: Phonological Aspects
Hizkuntz tipologia eta egitura sozialen arteko harremanak aztertzen dira hitzaldian zehar ondoko galderari erantzun egokiak bilatzen: zenbateraino da zilegi egitura linguistikoen tipologia, egitura sozialen tipologiarekin harremanetan jartzea? Era berean, zenbateraino eztabaida daiteke dialekto mota ezberdinak gizarte mota ezberdinetan ematen direla? Hitzaldian galdera hauek aztertzen dira, harreman sozial eta isolamendu sozialaren ildotik batez ere. RESUMEN En la ponencia se analizan las relaciones entre la tipología ngüística y la estructura social. Para ello el autor se pregunta ¿en qué medida se puede relacionar una tipología de estructuras lingüísticas con una de estructuras sociales? Por otra parte, ¿es o no válldo e] argumento, desde un enfoque lingüístico, de que cierto tipo de dialccto surge en cierto tipo de sociedades? La ponencia trata estos problemas, haciendo especial referencia a los contactos sociales y al aislamiento social.
New horizons in sociophonetic variation and change
New horizons in sociophonetic variation and change Arguably the main concern of modern linguistics has been to put forward evidence of an unchangeable and stable grammar in humans. At the same time variability remains a very fundamental property of human language. Language varies across communities, individuals and speech acts, and with language variability comes language change. The question at heart of the scientific endeavour concerned with linguistic variability is what causes language to change? This question is present at the core of disciplines such as historical linguistics, contact linguistics and, especially, (variationist) sociolinguistics. Sociolinguistics as a discipline has made great contributions to our understanding of variability in language and the complex workings of the human communicative faculty by showing that variation in speech follows quite robust patterns that bear relationships with social variables. The papers in this issue of Lingua are concerned with some of the key topics of modern sociolinguistics, namely to which extent individuals' and communities' social histories are reflected in the production of language and to which extent our social experiences influence our perception of language. The current issue even touches upon the question of how linguistic variation commences at an individual level. Phonetic issues have played a central part in studies of linguistic variation and change since the birth of sociolinguistics. William Labov's seminal studies in the 1960s were concerned especially with phonological or phonetic variation and change, and throughout the last half century sound change has remained a core focus of studies concerned with synchronic language variation. This issue of Lingua brings together six studies of phonetic variation and change in the English language. The articles have in common that they use sophisticated methodologies or innovative experimental designs to further our knowledge of exactly how and why language varies and changes and how variation and change relate to social factors. They also fall into the category that one might label sociophonetic research. The merger of the two fields of phonetics and sociolinguistics in sociophonetics has been described by Foulkes et al. (2010:704) as having 'the aim of identifying, and ultimately explaining, the sources, loci, parameters and communicative functions of socially structured variation in speech'. This aim thus applies to a large proportion of work done in the field of sociolinguistics, but also to work done in the discipline of phonetics. The specifically sociophonetic field of research can therefore be viewed as an overarching area of enquiry that contributes fundamental knowledge and theory to both sociolinguists and phoneticians. These two groups of linguists, although both benefitting from work done within the field of sociophonetics, do not necessarily share much more common ground, however. A focus on sociophonetics as a field of linguistics in its own right is therefore part of the motivation for publishing this special issue. Motivation for this issue is also found in the fact that sociophonetic work can help refine general linguistic theories, such as that of exemplar theory. As argued in Pierrehumbert (2001:1) typical phonological theories struggle to account for some of the detailed phonetic knowledge that speakers have, and the variability that exist in one individual's realisation of the same phonological categories in different lexical items. A usage-based component must therefore be included to such theories to account for why perception and production targets vary across lexical items, people, and communities. Exemplar theory does this by allowing for the possibility that informants store and categorise individual instances of sounds and lexical items in memory (cf. e.g. Pierrehumbert, 2001). When accounting for language production and perception the theory also necessarily comprises social exemplars, meaning that speakers can store social information alongside linguistic input. What is more, exemplar theory partly accounts for communal generational differences in language, i.e. observable language change, by suggesting that older speakers' amounts and types of exemplars differ from those of younger speakers simply through an increased amount of experience (cf. Pierrehumbert, 2001:11). Sociophonetic work can inform us of the role of exemplars in our linguistic system by showing variability in how social categories and linguistic detail are connected by listeners. Furthermore, work in sociophonetics can show how linguistic exemplars connected with particular social categories can lose out (or win) in processes of language change. A further motivation for the current special issue is to promote innovativeness in methodology as a general concern for current sociolinguistic research. A heightened awareness of methodological concerns is perhaps something that sets sociophonetic work apart from a lot of other work concerned with language variation and change. As mentioned above, investigations of the relationship between production of fine phonetic detail and social belonging have been prominent in the field of variationist linguistics since the 1960s (from the studies collected in Labov (1972), to more recent work such as Lingua 122 (2012) 749-752
THE IMPACT OF PHONETIC INFORMATION IN DIALECTOMETRY. A CASE STUDY OF HUNGARIAN DIALECT ATLASES 1
Dialectologia, 2018
The present study investigates the effect of the quantity of phonetic detail contained in the transcribed data on dialectometric output. The original narrow transcriptions of Hungarian dialect atlases are gradually broadened and the similarity matrices computed with the Levenshtein algorithm from the broader forms are compared to the one corresponding to the original form. Correlations are high for the majority of investigation points, but dialect enclaves and a number of locations situated at dialect borders are exceptions. For enclaves, a phonetically sensitive matrix shows the linguistic similarity with the "home" dialects more accurately, while a very broad transcription, lacking most phonetic details, thus more likely to reveal similarities at the lexical level, is suitable to highlight the recent impacts of the geographically close dialects. Findings on rich Hungarian dialect data and using a cost effective, computational method corroborate the results of previous studies regarding lexical vs. phonetic similarities. 186 EL IMPACTO DE LA INFORMACIÓN FONÉTICA EN DIALECTOMETRÍA. UN ESTUDIO DE CASO DE LOS ATLAS DIALECTALES HÚNGAROS Resumen El presente estudio investiga el efecto de la cantidad de detalles fonéticos contenidos en los datos transcritos sobre la producción dialectométrica. Las transcripciones estrictas originales de los atlas dialectales húngaros se han ampliado gradualmente y las matrices de similitud calculados con el algoritmo de Levenshtein a partir de las formas más amplias se comparan con las correspondientes a la forma original. Las correlaciones son elevadas para la mayoría de los puntos de investigación, pero los enclaves dialectales y una serie de localidades situadas en los límites del dialecto son excepciones. Para los enclaves, una matriz fonéticamente sensible muestra la similitud lingüística con los dialectos "locales" de modo más preciso, mientras que una transcripción muy amplia, carente de la mayoría de los detalles fonéticos, y por lo tanto más propensos a revelar similitudes a nivel léxico, es adecuada para resaltar los impactos recientes de los dialectos geográficamente cercanos. Los hallazgos en los valiosos datos del dialecto húngaro y el uso de un método computacional rentable corroboran los resultados de estudios previos con respecto a las similitudes léxicas y fonéticas. Palabras clave dialectometría, transcripción fonética estricta, enclaves dialectales, atlas dialecales húngaros, dialectometría correlativa