什么是民间语言学?

Malbryting Pub Date : 2019-04-09 DOI:10.7557/17.4751
Dennis R. Preston
{"title":"什么是民间语言学?","authors":"Dennis R. Preston","doi":"10.7557/17.4751","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Folk Linguistics (Mouton de Gruyter, 1999), Nancy Niedzielski and I hope to have shown that the beliefs about, reactions to, and comments on language by what we call \"real people\" (i.e., nonlinguists) are interesting, illuminating, and empowering from ethnographic, linguistic, and practical (or applied linguistic) points of view. I still believe so and am delighted to see in the literature and at many conferences that others apparently agree. So what's new? On a positive note, I believe that the final chapter of Folk Linguistics has pointed and continues to point the way to a great deal of as yet unexplored potential — the careful consideration of the underlying presuppositions and beliefs which lie behind the discourses and actions that constitute the primary data of folk linguistics. What are the folk theories of language held by real people, and how can we extract them from their discourses and actions? In Folk Linguistics several approaches to acquiring and interpreting relevant data were catalogued, but I am all too aware, as Niedzielski and I confess in the last chapter of that work, that much of what we did could be called \"ostensive discourse analysis.\" We acquired the discourses of real people about language, transcribed them, held them up to the view of the reader, and said what we thought they meant and how they contrasted and/or converged with the belief(s) of \"real linguists.\" Except for some of the operational tasks which we assigned respondents, that procedure was our general plan, and I am not unhappy with it. I think the data reported in Folk Linguistics is still the","PeriodicalId":34111,"journal":{"name":"Malbryting","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"92","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is Folk Linguistics?\",\"authors\":\"Dennis R. Preston\",\"doi\":\"10.7557/17.4751\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In Folk Linguistics (Mouton de Gruyter, 1999), Nancy Niedzielski and I hope to have shown that the beliefs about, reactions to, and comments on language by what we call \\\"real people\\\" (i.e., nonlinguists) are interesting, illuminating, and empowering from ethnographic, linguistic, and practical (or applied linguistic) points of view. I still believe so and am delighted to see in the literature and at many conferences that others apparently agree. So what's new? On a positive note, I believe that the final chapter of Folk Linguistics has pointed and continues to point the way to a great deal of as yet unexplored potential — the careful consideration of the underlying presuppositions and beliefs which lie behind the discourses and actions that constitute the primary data of folk linguistics. What are the folk theories of language held by real people, and how can we extract them from their discourses and actions? In Folk Linguistics several approaches to acquiring and interpreting relevant data were catalogued, but I am all too aware, as Niedzielski and I confess in the last chapter of that work, that much of what we did could be called \\\"ostensive discourse analysis.\\\" We acquired the discourses of real people about language, transcribed them, held them up to the view of the reader, and said what we thought they meant and how they contrasted and/or converged with the belief(s) of \\\"real linguists.\\\" Except for some of the operational tasks which we assigned respondents, that procedure was our general plan, and I am not unhappy with it. I think the data reported in Folk Linguistics is still the\",\"PeriodicalId\":34111,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Malbryting\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"92\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Malbryting\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7557/17.4751\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malbryting","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7557/17.4751","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 92

摘要

Nancy Niedzielski和我希望在《民间语言学》(Mouton de Gruyter,1999)一书中表明,从人种学、语言学和实践(或应用语言学)的角度来看,我们所称的“真人”(即非语言学家)对语言的信仰、反应和评论是有趣的、有启发性的和赋权的。我仍然相信这一点,并很高兴在文献和许多会议上看到其他人显然同意这一点。那么有什么新鲜事吗?从积极的方面来说,我相信《民间语言学》的最后一章已经并将继续为许多尚未探索的潜力指明道路——仔细考虑构成民间语言学主要数据的话语和行动背后的潜在前提和信念。真实的人所持有的民间语言理论是什么?我们如何从他们的话语和行动中提取这些理论?在《民间语言学》中,我们列举了几种获取和解释相关数据的方法,但正如Niedzielski和我在该著作的最后一章中所承认的那样,我非常清楚,我们所做的大部分工作可以被称为“明示话语分析”,并说出了我们认为他们的意思,以及他们是如何与“真正的语言学家”的信念形成对比和/或融合的。除了我们分配给受访者的一些操作任务外,这个程序是我们的总体计划,我对此并不不满。我认为《民间语言学》报道的数据仍然是
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
What is Folk Linguistics?
In Folk Linguistics (Mouton de Gruyter, 1999), Nancy Niedzielski and I hope to have shown that the beliefs about, reactions to, and comments on language by what we call "real people" (i.e., nonlinguists) are interesting, illuminating, and empowering from ethnographic, linguistic, and practical (or applied linguistic) points of view. I still believe so and am delighted to see in the literature and at many conferences that others apparently agree. So what's new? On a positive note, I believe that the final chapter of Folk Linguistics has pointed and continues to point the way to a great deal of as yet unexplored potential — the careful consideration of the underlying presuppositions and beliefs which lie behind the discourses and actions that constitute the primary data of folk linguistics. What are the folk theories of language held by real people, and how can we extract them from their discourses and actions? In Folk Linguistics several approaches to acquiring and interpreting relevant data were catalogued, but I am all too aware, as Niedzielski and I confess in the last chapter of that work, that much of what we did could be called "ostensive discourse analysis." We acquired the discourses of real people about language, transcribed them, held them up to the view of the reader, and said what we thought they meant and how they contrasted and/or converged with the belief(s) of "real linguists." Except for some of the operational tasks which we assigned respondents, that procedure was our general plan, and I am not unhappy with it. I think the data reported in Folk Linguistics is still the
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
26 weeks
期刊最新文献
Elevers språkbruk: Hvordan forbedre relasjoner i klasserommet Nyt lys på gamle data "Jeg har aldri brukt nynorsk før" Jødetysk, jargon, jiddisk Studentvurderingar av forholdet mellom engelsk og lokale språk på fem nordiske universitet
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1