Search

This introductory paper outlines the different trends and movements that have in recent years led to a marked increase in the number of linguistic studies that combine a construction-based theoretical outlook on grammar with a dedicated interest in issues of synchronic and/or diachronic language variation. In addition, it gives an overview of the papers included in this thematic issue and links them with broader tendencies in the fields of cognitive linguistics and construction grammar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper aims to encourage the interdisciplinary study of 'languageculture,' an approach to language and culture in which ideology, linguistic and cultural forms, as well as praxis are studied in relation to another (cf. Cornips et al 2012). It focuses on the construction of local and regional identities in Limburg and the linguistic political context of this Southern-Netherlands region where people are strongly aware of their linguistic distinctiveness. This contribution addresses the impact of globalization processes and mobility of speakers resulting in new and complex patterns of cultural and linguistic encounters. Since globalization does not only affect dominant areas, we need a new understanding of language and identities in peripheral areas in Europe (cf. Cornips et al. 2012). Although dialects are traditionally seen and analyzed as something that anchor people in a local context, speakers have become translocal i.e. people and the ways in which they speak are on the move (cf. Quist 2010). In this paper, in contrast to dialectology and dialect atlases based on modern linguistic theoretical insights like the Syntactic Atlas of the Dutch Dialects (SAND), place is not conceived in objective, physical terms but instead as an emic, culturally defined category (Johnstone 2004). The process of place-making provides insight in how people categorize themselves and others through languagecultural practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper discusses variation and change in seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury Dutch, reviewing the importance of two types of explanation, the first focusing on dialect contact resulting from immigration as the locus of change, the second stressing the importance of writing conventions. Using a unique corpus of private letters from all social ranks, we discuss various phonological and morphosyntactic variables. We argue that ego-documents offer unique opportunities for historical (socio)linguistics, providing an unprecedented view of the vernacular. At the same time, writers did not consistently put their local dialect to paper. Writing practices such as morphological and syllabic orthographic principles caused the written code to move away from the vernacular. Supralocalization and graphemization, which are topics at the core of historical sociolinguistics, have to be taken into account by anyone interested in the communicative strategies which ordinary people used when they needed to write. At the same time, since supralocalization and graphemization may impede research on spoken language phenomena, they should also be addressed by researchers primarily interested in spoken language phenomena such as dialect contact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]