{"title":"荷兰方言同源语音的相对差异:探索性研究","authors":"W. Heeringa, B. Joseph","doi":"10.3115/1626516.1626521","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we use the Reeks Nederlandse Dialectatlassen as a source for the reconstruction of a 'proto-language' of Dutch dialects. We used 360 dialects from locations in the Netherlands, the northern part of Belgium and French-Flanders. The density of dialect locations is about the same everywhere. For each dialect we reconstructed 85 words. For the reconstruction of vowels we used knowledge of Dutch history, and for the reconstruction of consonants we used well-known tendencies found in most textbooks about historical linguistics. We validated results by comparing the reconstructed forms with pronunciations according to a proto-Germanic dictionary (Kobler, 2003). For 46% of the words we reconstructed the same vowel or the closest possible vowel when the vowel to be reconstructed was not found in the dialect material. For 52% of the words all consonants we reconstructed were the same. For 42% of the words, only one consonant was differently reconstructed. We measured the divergence of Dutch dialects from their 'proto-language'. We measured pronunciation distances to the proto-language we reconstructed ourselves and correlated them with pronunciation distances we measured to proto-Germanic based on the dictionary. Pronunciation distances were measured using Levenshtein distance, a string edit distance measure. We found a relatively strong correlation (r=0.87).","PeriodicalId":186158,"journal":{"name":"Special Interest Group on Computational Morphology and Phonology Workshop","volume":"179 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Relative Divergence of Dutch Dialect Pronunciations from their Common Source: An Exploratory Study\",\"authors\":\"W. Heeringa, B. Joseph\",\"doi\":\"10.3115/1626516.1626521\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper we use the Reeks Nederlandse Dialectatlassen as a source for the reconstruction of a 'proto-language' of Dutch dialects. We used 360 dialects from locations in the Netherlands, the northern part of Belgium and French-Flanders. The density of dialect locations is about the same everywhere. For each dialect we reconstructed 85 words. For the reconstruction of vowels we used knowledge of Dutch history, and for the reconstruction of consonants we used well-known tendencies found in most textbooks about historical linguistics. We validated results by comparing the reconstructed forms with pronunciations according to a proto-Germanic dictionary (Kobler, 2003). For 46% of the words we reconstructed the same vowel or the closest possible vowel when the vowel to be reconstructed was not found in the dialect material. For 52% of the words all consonants we reconstructed were the same. For 42% of the words, only one consonant was differently reconstructed. We measured the divergence of Dutch dialects from their 'proto-language'. We measured pronunciation distances to the proto-language we reconstructed ourselves and correlated them with pronunciation distances we measured to proto-Germanic based on the dictionary. Pronunciation distances were measured using Levenshtein distance, a string edit distance measure. We found a relatively strong correlation (r=0.87).\",\"PeriodicalId\":186158,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Special Interest Group on Computational Morphology and Phonology Workshop\",\"volume\":\"179 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Special Interest Group on Computational Morphology and Phonology Workshop\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3115/1626516.1626521\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Special Interest Group on Computational Morphology and Phonology Workshop","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3115/1626516.1626521","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
在本文中,我们使用Reeks Nederlandse Dialectatlassen作为重建荷兰方言“原始语言”的来源。我们使用了来自荷兰、比利时北部和法属佛兰德斯地区的360种方言。方言分布的密度在任何地方都差不多。对于每种方言,我们重建了85个单词。为了重建元音,我们使用了荷兰历史知识,为了重建辅音,我们使用了大多数历史语言学教科书中众所周知的趋势。我们根据原始日耳曼语词典(Kobler, 2003)将重建的形式与发音进行比较,验证了结果。对于46%的单词,当要重构的元音在方言材料中找不到时,我们重构了相同的元音或最接近的元音。对于52%的单词,我们重建的所有辅音都是相同的。在42%的单词中,只有一个辅音有不同的重构。我们测量了荷兰方言与其“原始语言”之间的差异。我们测量了与原始语言的发音距离,我们重建了自己,并将它们与基于字典的原始日耳曼语的发音距离相关联。发音距离使用Levenshtein距离测量,这是一种字符串编辑距离测量。我们发现相关性相对较强(r=0.87)。
The Relative Divergence of Dutch Dialect Pronunciations from their Common Source: An Exploratory Study
In this paper we use the Reeks Nederlandse Dialectatlassen as a source for the reconstruction of a 'proto-language' of Dutch dialects. We used 360 dialects from locations in the Netherlands, the northern part of Belgium and French-Flanders. The density of dialect locations is about the same everywhere. For each dialect we reconstructed 85 words. For the reconstruction of vowels we used knowledge of Dutch history, and for the reconstruction of consonants we used well-known tendencies found in most textbooks about historical linguistics. We validated results by comparing the reconstructed forms with pronunciations according to a proto-Germanic dictionary (Kobler, 2003). For 46% of the words we reconstructed the same vowel or the closest possible vowel when the vowel to be reconstructed was not found in the dialect material. For 52% of the words all consonants we reconstructed were the same. For 42% of the words, only one consonant was differently reconstructed. We measured the divergence of Dutch dialects from their 'proto-language'. We measured pronunciation distances to the proto-language we reconstructed ourselves and correlated them with pronunciation distances we measured to proto-Germanic based on the dictionary. Pronunciation distances were measured using Levenshtein distance, a string edit distance measure. We found a relatively strong correlation (r=0.87).