1. Liberating Dialectology Dialectometry Festival for Martijn Wieling 29 June 2012 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen J.K. Chambers, University of Toronto

2. Liberating Dialectology Dialectometry Festival for Martijn Wieling 29 June 2012 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen J.K. Chambers, University of Toronto

3. Liberating Dialectology Dialectometry Festival for Martijn Wieling 29 June 2012 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen J.K. Chambers, University of Toronto Louis Gauchat (1866-1942)

4. Liberating Dialectology Dialectometry Festival for Martijn Wieling 29 June 2012 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen J.K. Chambers, University of Toronto Louis Gauchat (1866-1942) Takesi Sibata (1918-2007)

5. Liberating Dialectology Dialectometry Festival for Martijn Wieling 29 June 2012 Rijksuniversiteit Groningen J.K. Chambers, University of Toronto Louis Gauchat (1866-1942) Takesi Sibata (1918-2007) Jan Czekanowski (1882-1965)

6. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry”

7. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social

8. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social Dialectometry applies sophisticated statistical methods to huge corpora

9. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social Dialectometry applies sophisticated statistical methods to huge corpora relatively undeveloped at evaluating variable strength and social significance

10. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social Dialectometry applies sophisticated statistical methods to huge corpora relatively undeveloped at evaluating variable strength and social significance Martijn’s theme— we need a better balance

11. Recognizing that dialectology can be dialectometry Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social we take it for granted that

12. Recognizing that dialectology can be dialectometry Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social we take it for granted thatfor more than a century qualitative invariant regional

13. Recognizing that dialectology can be dialectometry Dialectology is quantitative variationist and social we take it for granted thatfor more than a century qualitative invariant regional A few visionaries saw through the structuralist rigidity their achievements usually had little or no immediate impact looking back reveals something about the core values of our discipline

14. Jan Czekanowski (1882-1965), Polish anthropologist cosmopolitan: studied in Warsaw, Zurich (D.Sc.1906); worked in Museum of Ethology, Berlin, curator in Ethnology Museum, St. Petersburg; professor of anthropology University of L’vov 1913-41(Poland till 1939, then Ukraine), and Poznan 1946 (at 64).

15. Jan Czekanowski (1882-1965), Polish anthropologist cosmopolitan: studied in Warsaw, Zurich (D.Sc.1906); worked in Museum of Ethology, Berlin, curator in Ethnology Museum, St. Petersburg; professor of anthropology University of L’vov 1913-41(Poland till 1939, then Ukraine), and Poznan 1946 (at 64). 1942 he convinced German “race scientists” that Karaim, a Polish-Lithuanian ethnic group, were Turkic although they practised Judaisim and used Hebrew as liturgical language (according Great Soviet Encyclopedia www.allvoices.com )

16. Jan Czekanowski (1882-1965), Polish anthropologist cosmopolitan: studied in Warsaw, Zurich (D.Sc.1906); worked in Museum of Ethology, Berlin, curator in Ethnology Museum, St. Petersburg; professor of anthropology University of L’vov 1913-41(Poland till 1939, then Ukraine), and Poznan 1946 (at 64). 1942 he convinced German “race scientists” that Karaim, a Polish-Lithuanian ethnic group, were Turkic although they practised Judaisim and used Hebrew as liturgical language (according Great Soviet Encyclopedia www.allvoices.com ) 1920s compared cultural relatedness by counting shared cultural features 1927 compared Polish dialects based on shared morphology features 1928 compared Indo-European dialects using same methods 1929 compared Slavic dialects by this method

17. Czekanowski’s method compile list of linguistic features calculate correlation coefficients for each pair of dialects using formula known as Q6— (1)number of features present in both (2)number of features absent in both (3)the number present in the first but absent in the second (4)the number absent in the first but present in the second

18. Czekanowski’s method compile list of linguistic features calculate correlation coefficients for each pair of dialects using formula known as Q6— (1)number of features present in both (2)number of features absent in both (3)the number present in the first but absent in the second (4)the number absent in the first but present in the second Czekanowski, Jan (1931) Róznicowanie sie Dialectów Prastowinskich w Swietle Kryterjum Ilociowego [Differentiation of Ancient Slavic Dialects….] Prague: First Congress… 1928 pairwise comparisons— multivariate statistics in future

19. Czekanowski’s ‘map’ dialects are arranged in sequence of their values each one correlates perfectly with itself Czekanowski, Jan (1931) Róznicowanie sie Dialectów Prastowinskich w Swietle Kryterjum Ilociowego [Differentiation of Ancient Slavic Dialects….] Prague: First Congress… 1928

20. Czekanowski’s ‘map’ dialects are arranged in sequence of their values each one correlates perfectly with itself Czekanowski, Jan (1931) Róznicowanie sie Dialectów Prastowinskich w Swietle Kryterjum Ilociowego [Differentiation of Ancient Slavic Dialects….] Prague: First Congress… 1928 coefficients are subdivided and each range represented by a symbol Czech and Slovak correlate <.80

21. Czekanowski’s ‘map’ dialects are arranged in sequence of their values each one correlates perfectly with itself Czekanowski, Jan (1931) Róznicowanie sie Dialectów Prastowinskich w Swietle Kryterjum Ilociowego [Differentiation of Ancient Slavic Dialects….] Prague: First Congress… 1928 coefficients are subdivided and each range represented by a symbol Czech and Slovak correlate <.80 Górnoluzhitsky correlates w Czech <.80 and with Slovak.80 -.60

22. Czekanowski’s ‘map’ ‘map’ only in most abstract sense no attempt at geographic representation of correlates Kroeber, A.L., and C.D. Chrétien (1937) “Quantitative classification of Indo-European languages.” Language 13: 83-103. but effective as cartogram Kroeber and Chrétien (1937: 84): “If the symbol values are chosen judiciously, the diagram becomes an exceedingly effective and rapidly grasped representation of the stronger relationships, wherein the salient features of the classification force themselves upon the eye and the mind through the automatic clustering of symbols.”

23. Applying Czekanowski’s method—30 years too soon Alva Davis & Raven McDavid: “[in transition areas] …one is at a loss to give convincing reasons for the restriction of some items and the spreading of others” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 traditionalists

24. Applying Czekanowski’s method—30 years too soon Alva Davis & Raven McDavid: “[in transition areas] …one is at a loss to give convincing reasons for the restriction of some items and the spreading of others” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 traditionalists David Reed & John Spicer: “the speech patterns of transition areas grow much clearer when viewed as quantitative rather than qualitative phenomena.” Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer. 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area. ” Language 28: 348-59. innovators

25. Case study— “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 Alva Davis and Raven McDavid fieldworkers for the Linguistic Atlas of the US and Canada

26. Case study— “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 Alva Davis and Raven McDavid fieldworkers for the Linguistic Atlas of the US and Canada first survey regions (ca. 1930-43) on Atlantic seaboard

27. Case study— “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 Alva Davis and Raven McDavid fieldworkers for the Linguistic Atlas of the US and Canada first survey regions (ca. 1930-43) on Atlantic seaboard as it moved into more recently settled inland states, dialect patterns became less coherent

28. Case study— “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 Davis and McDavid fascinated by small area in Ohio because “competing forms exist in it side by side.”

29. “Competing forms… side by side” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 5 towns, 2 subjects in each one NORM (P1, D1, O1, V1, US1) one man more educated, socially active— all aged 73-94

30. “Competing forms… side by side” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 5 towns, 2 subjects in each competing forms usually Northern (N) vs. Midland (M) variants lexica l pronunciation morphological one NORM (P1, D1, O1, V1, US1) one man more educated, socially active— all aged 73-94

31. “Competing forms… side by side” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 finding a pattern is difficult even for subset of variants— all neighbours disagree sometimes

32. “Competing forms… side by side” Davis, Alva, and Raven I. McDavid. 1950. “Northwestern Ohio: a transition area.” Language 26: 186-89 finding a pattern is difficult even for subset of variants— all neighbours disagree sometimes D & McD: “…one is at a loss to give convincing reasons for the restriction of some items and the spreading of others” “This sampling… [illustrates] the problems of dialect formation in this country, where speech mixture must have been the rule from the earliest colonial times.”

33. D & McD: “…one is at a loss to give convincing reasons for the restriction of some items and the spreading of others” Taking up the challenge Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. reply in Language two years later — David Reed and John Spicer: “the speech patterns of transition areas grow much clearer when viewed as quantitative rather than qualitative phenomena.” Reed and Spicer were fieldworkers for LAUSC in California, even more recently settled than Ohio

34. D & McD: “…one is at a loss to give convincing reasons for the restriction of some items and the spreading of others” Taking up the challenge Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. reply in Language two years later — David Reed and John Spicer: “the speech patterns of transition areas grow much clearer when viewed as quantitative rather than qualitative phenomena.” Reed and Spicer were fieldworkers for LAUSC in California, even more recently settled than Ohio for Reed and Spicer, heterogeneity seemed normal, as it does to us today viewing it as quantitative was decades ahead of its time— and their mapping technique probably did not help their cause

35. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 R & S applied Czekanowski’s method for each pair of speakers, determine presence or absence of each variant derive correlation coefficients by the Q6 formula

36. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 R & S applied Czekanowski’s method for each pair of speakers, determine presence or absence of each variant derive correlation coefficients by the Q6 formula map the results using isogrades (after Wilhelm Milke 1935)

37. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 5 sub-maps, one for each town as reference point (technically require 10) each town correlates perfectly with itself (1.0)

38. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 5 sub-maps, one for each town as reference point (technically require 10) each town correlates perfectly with itself (1.0) rough (imperfect) correlation— the closer the town, the higher the coefficient

39. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 5 sub-maps, one for each town as reference point (technically require 10) each town correlates perfectly with itself (1.0) rough (imperfect) correlation— the closer the town, the higher the coefficient more accurate— the two southern towns are most similar to one another, and the northern one is most different from the others

40. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 5 sub-maps, one for each town as reference point (technically require 10) each town correlates perfectly with itself (1.0) rough (imperfect) correlation— the closer the town, the higher the coefficient more accurate— the two southern towns are most similar to one another, and the northern one is most different from the others mapping schema is very complicated and unrevealing variable pattern must be inferred from 5-way relationships inferences far too complex and subtle to be readily conceptualized

41. Reed, David W., and John L. Spicer 1952 “Correlation methods of comparing dialects in a transition area.” Language 28: 348-59. Quantifying the Ohio data with Q6 5 sub-maps, one for each town as reference point (technically require 10) each town correlates perfectly with itself (1.0) rough (imperfect) correlation— the closer the town, the higher the coefficient more accurate— the two southern towns are most similar to one another, and the northern one is most different from the others mapping schema is very complicated and unrevealing variable pattern must be inferred from 5-way relationships inferences far too complex and subtle to be readily conceptualized definitely fails Kroeber’s test— the schema is not a “rapidly grasped representation of the stronger relationships” the “salient features” do not “force themselves upon the eye and the mind”

42. Were Reed & Spicer ahead of their time? their reanalysis had no impact on the field— American dialectology remained qualitative, etc. Reed and Spicer apparently gave up dialect studies soon after— the California survey of LAUSC has never been completed

43. Were Reed & Spicer ahead of their time? bivariate statistics, a breakthrough at the time, now looks primitive retaining geographical mapping obscures rather than reveals their reanalysis had no impact on the field— American dialectology remained qualitative, etc. Reed and Spicer apparently gave up dialect studies soon after— the California survey of LAUSC has never been completed

44. Were Reed & Spicer ahead of their time? bivariate statistics, a breakthrough at the time, now looks primitive retaining geographical mapping obscures rather than reveals their reanalysis had no impact on the field— American dialectology remained qualitative, etc. Reed and Spicer apparently gave up dialect studies soon after— the California survey of LAUSC has never been completed 50 years later, reanalysis with multivariate statistics (correspondence analysis) Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill 1998 Dialectology. Cambridge University Press. 144-48.

45. Were Reed & Spicer ahead of their time? bivariate statistics, a breakthrough at the time, now looks primitive retaining geographical mapping obscures rather than reveals their reanalysis had no impact on the field— American dialectology remained qualitative, etc. Reed and Spicer apparently gave up dialect studies soon after— the California survey of LAUSC has never been completed 50 years later, reanalysis with multivariate statistics (correspondence analysis) Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill 1998 Dialectology. Cambridge University Press. 144-48. essentially Northern essentially Midland mixe d

46. Geographical correlates? veals statistical program encoded NO geographic information. Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill 1998 Dialectology. Cambridge University Press. 144-48. essentially Northern essentially Midland mixe d

47. Geographical correlates? veals statistical program encoded NO geographic information. Chambers, J.K. and Peter Trudgill 1998 Dialectology. Cambridge University Press. 144-48. essentially Northern essentially Midland mixe d Why does geographic distance match statistical distance? Because people who live close together tend to speak more like one another than people who live further away no matter how you measure it

48. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” succinct statement of the main thrust of dialect studies in the 21 st century

49. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Martijn’s thesis shows that we have come a long way in a fairly short time succinct statement of the main thrust of dialect studies in the 21 st century

50. Martijn Wieling’s theme in his thesis— “Increasing the dialectology in dialectometry” Martijn’s thesis shows that we have come a long way in a fairly short time His theme reminds us that we still have a long way to go

51. for further information, check our website www.chass.utoronto.ca/~chambers