A comparison of the use of relatization in the Swedish regional dialects spoken in Burträsk and Ström
2002 (English)In: Preceedings to the XI:th International Conference on Methods in Dialectology, 2002Conference paper (Other (popular science, discussion, etc.))
The data presented in this paper comes from tape recordings made as part of the dialect project "The phonetics and phonology of the Swedish dialects around the year 2000, SWEDIA 2000". Karlsson and Sullivan (in press) investigated relative marker usage in Burträsk. Due to its situation at the northern periphery of the Swedish dialect rectangle and as a non-coastal settlement, Karlsson and Sullivan (in press) believed that the Burträsk dialect may well reveal traces of older variants of Swedish. As the SWEDIA dialect database is balanced for informant gender and age, it permitted the investigation of both the infiltration of standard Swedish relativizers into this northern dialect of Swedish and the influence of gender in any other change that may have occurred during the twentieth century. From the tape-recordings of eight informants' spontaneous speech lasting a total of 7 hours and 35 minutes, Karlsson and Sullivan (in press) found a strong preference in the Burträsk dialect for relative clause constructions involving a moving (realized) subject, that relativization involving object movement is also used, but less frequently, and that in relative clauses involving the null relative marker, subject and object correlates occur with equal frequency. Further, no significant difference in relative marker usage was found due to either age or gender. Of particular note was that no examples of the use of constructions using a wh-word, such as vars or vilken/vilket were found in the data provided by any of the eight informants. Unlike, the complementizer som that was found in the data vars or vilken/vilket always imply a more formal, or standard, speaking style. This paper extends the Karlsson and Sullivan study by posing the same questions in relation to the dialect spoken in Ström and thereafter by comparing and constrasting the Ström data with the Burträsk data. Like Burträsk, Ström is a non-coastal settlement. It lies around 350km southwest of Burträsk and has since the middle ages been a trading centre. Of particular interest is that Ström lies in Jämtland, which was part of Norway until 1645. The comparative data presented in this paper may provide picture of how the use of relativization is affected when a settlement has contact with neighbouring dialects due to its position as a training centre and due to its less peripheral location within the Swedish Dialect Rectangle.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-10277OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-10277DiVA: diva2:149948