Slide 1

Pat Maher We Speak Unique: Folk Linguistic Perceptions and Attitudes of Dialect in Japan

Slide 2

Introduction: Research Area Perceptual Dialectology Dialect in Japan Perceptual vs. Production Based-Data Dialect Identity

Slide 3

Aims/Justification Study of dialect primarily production data-based Perceptual dialectology primarily focused on national level Regionally focused perceptual dialectology has both confirmed and expanded on production data-based studies Calls for dialect identity studies in Japan Perceptions of where AND what constitutes standard How far does the area of my dialect expand? How does ones dialect identity determine perceptions?

Slide 4

References Benson, Erica J. (2003). Folk Linguistic Perceptions and the Mapping of Dialect Boundaries. American Speech, 78, 3, 307-330. Inoue, F. (1995). Classification of Dialects by Image: English and Japanese. In Preston, D.R. (1999). Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology, Vol. 1 (pp. 147-159). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Iwamoto, M. (1983). (Dialects of Miyazaki Prefecture). Miyazaki University. http://www.miyazaki-c.ed.jp/himukagaku/unit/yume_05/page3.html Long, D. (1997). The Perception of Standard as the Speech Variety of a Specific Region: Computer-Produced Composite Maps of Perceptual Dialect Regions. In Thomas, A. (1997). Current Methods in Dialectology (pp. 256-270). Bangor: University of Wales. Long, D. (1999). Mapping Nonlinguists Evaluations of Japanese Language Variation. In Preston, D.R. (1999). Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology, Vol. 1 (pp. 199-226). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Mase, Y. (1964). Dialect Consciousness and Dialect Divisions: Examples in the Nagano-Gifu Boundary Region. In Preston, D.R.(1999). Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology, Vol.1 (pp. 71-99). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Preston, D. (1988). Methods in the Study of Dialect Perceptions. Methods in Dialectology, 373-395. Sibata, T. (1959). Consciousness of Dialect Boundaries. In Preston, D.R. (1999). Handbook of Perceptual Dialectology, Vol.1 (pp. 39-62). Amsterdam: Benjamins.

Slide 5

Research Questions How do perceptions of regional dialect boundaries compare with prior production data-based dialect boundaries? How do perceptions of national dialect boundaries compare between Miyazaki and Aichi Prefecture respondents? What similarities/differences in attitudes do Miyazaki and Aichi Prefecture respondents show in regards to: Standard Japanese Where and What Correctness & Pleasantness of Dialects throughout Japan Correctness & Pleasantness of Personal Dialect Uniqueness of Personal Dialect

Slide 6

Methodology (Subjects) 30 Subjects from Miyazaki Prefecture Have lived in Miyazaki from at least age 5 Miyazaki University Students (age 18-22) 15 Male & 15 Female 30 Subjects from Aichi Prefecture Have lived in Aichi from at least age 5 Chubu University Students (age 18-22) 15 Male & 15 Female Subjects have no educational background in the study of dialect

Slide 7

Methodology (Materials/Instruments) Regional Dialect Study Perceptual Map Task Degree-of-Difference Task National Dialect Study Perceptual Map Task Identify Standard Japanese Area Degree-of-Correctness/Pleasantness Task Dialect Identity Study Focus Group Interviews

Slide 8

Methodology (Materials/Instruments)

Slide 9

Slide 10

Methodology (Procedure) Regional Dialect Study Students asked to demarcate areas where people speak similarly or differently (drawing lines, circles, etc.) Students asked to label each area (name, descriptor, etc.) Students complete degree-of-difference task 20 pre-selected cities in and around each respective prefecture Give each city a rank between 1-4 1: Speak exactly like me 2: Speak a little differently 3: Speak somewhat differently 4: Speak quite differently

Slide 11

Methodology (Procedure) National Dialect Study Students asked to demarcate areas where people speak similarly or differently (drawing lines, circles, etc.) Students asked to label each area (name, descriptor, etc.) Students identify area(s) where Standard Japanese is spoken Degree-of-Correctness/Pleasantness Task: Give each demarcated area a rank between 1-4: CorrectnessPleasantness 1: Proper Japanese1: Very Pleasant 2: Mostly Proper2: Somewhat Pleasant 3: Not Very Proper3: Not Very Pleasant 4: Not Proper4: Not Pleasant

Slide 12

Methodology (Procedure) Dialect Identity Study (Number of Subjects Undecided) At least a week after perceptual map tasks have been completed Focus group interviews to ask questions about maps and illicit: What do respondents feel constitutes Standard Japanese? How conscious are respondents of others dialects? How conscious are respondents of their own dialects? How correct do respondents view their own dialects? How do respondents feel others view their own (respondents) dialects? How widespread or limited do respondents view their Dialect Area? and probably more in aiming to paint a picture of dialect identity Map results will have great bearing on direction of interviews

Slide 13

Methodology (Data & Analysis) Regional perceptual maps averaged into consensus maps Consensus maps compared with production data-based maps for each region respectively Regional degree-of-difference task figures averaged Figures analyzed to measure perceptions of my dialect area National perceptual maps averaged into consensus maps Miyazaki and Aichi consensus maps compared National degree-of-correctness/pleasantness figures averaged Miyazaki and Aichi figures compared Focus group interview data transcribed Similarities/Differences between Miyazaki and Aichi respondents discussed

Slide 14

Anticipated Problems/Limitations Unfamiliarity/unawareness of language variation Guessing rather than expression of perceptions on map tasks Abundance of outliers Inability to create consensus perceptions for areas Lack of accessible subjects for Miyazaki focus groups Silence/unwillingness to contribute opinions in focus groups Conforming to opinions of others during focus groups Too much data

Slide 15

Expected Findings Regional dialect boundary perceptions will be similar to production data-based boundaries, but more detailed Miyazaki respondents will perceive a greater degree of difference in their region than Aichi respondents Miyazaki respondents will perceive a larger area for Standard Japanese than Aichi respondents Miyazaki respondents will perceive Standard Japanese as more correct/pleasant than Aichi respondents

Slide 16

Expected Findings (continued) Aichi respondents will perceive a larger my dialect area than Miyazaki respondents Miyazaki respondents will perceive their respective dialects as more unique compared to Aichi respondents

Slide 17

I look forward to your constructive feedback. Have a lovely day.