Abbildungen der Seite

much time. Moreover, a Dialect Dictionary is already under consideration by another group.

PROKOSCH: We cannot tell in advance which of these four points will be the most important. In different localities different points may have peculiar interest.

STURTEVANT: Some of the European atlases are based primarily on vocabulary; so there is room for a difference of opinion. LONG: Vocabulary is confusing rather than helpful in collecting material for speech maps. Pronunciation is the most important element for defining local areas. Words are carried far from their natural habitats in this country.

BOLLING: agreed with Prokosch. All features are of importance. Vocabulary was strongly emphasized in the latest work on Greek Dialects.

KENT: Pronunciation can be recorded by mechanical means. Morphological and syntactical differences are apt to be slighter. Differences of vocabulary are marked, and easily recorded (though not by mechanical means). If we do not consider a point which is the chief feature of other atlases, we destroy a valuable basis for comparison. KURATH: Theoretically, all dialectal features should be included in our study. But if 500 places are to be investigated and each community must be handled, let us say, in a week, for financial reasons or for lack of field workers, then the scope of the material must be reduced. Some phonetic, morphological, syntactical, and lexical matters must be neglected. No definite decision can be reached until after some experience in the field. Perhaps someone will first work up a number of key positions, using a large body of material; then it should be possible to determine which features can be eliminated with the least disadvantage. ARMSTRONG: Question III is one of the most important to discuss, not for purpose of decision, but to let each other know our opinions. If we do not include vocabulary in our Atlas we are going absolutely counter to the method of the French Atlas. But that does not matter if our problem is a different one. We must be practical, and be able to convince the purse holders that our project is not too large to be completed, nor too expensive. If all four of the features mentioned cannot be considered, we want to know which are the more important. ROEDDER: The German Atlas considered only phonology. The present workers on it feel that vocabulary and syntax should have been included. Perhaps 75% of importance should be attached to phonol

ogy, 25% to lexicology, and morphology and syntax might be left to take care of themselves.

LONG: agreed almost entirely with Roedder, but thought that on account of the foreign elements in this country syntax is more important here than elsewhere.

MÜLLER: If we neglect vocabulary, we go counter to the practice of the atlases of France and Italy. 75% of importance should be attached to vocabulary, 25% to other aspects.

KENYON: Our problem is different from that of Europe. We have no old dialects with strongly diversified vocabulary. Therefore vocabulary will be of less importance in our investigation. Pronunciation is more important. Words are borrowed and adapted in phonology to the borrowing dialect. Syntax and morphology are sometimes significant. A phrase like the spellingest child reveals the speaker's dialect.

PARMENTER: It is better to cut down by restricting the territory than by reducing the number of things to study. If a small number of communities are thoroughly covered, a good start will be made. Dissertations and monographs will repeat the process for other places. If we study all phases of speech, we shall enlist the interest of all groups. The Atlas will not be definitive in any case. EDGERTON: endorsed this view, and referring to Kenyon's remarks, said that changes of phonology sometimes result from change of habitat. If we are going to leave out of our investigation the elements which are subject to change, we shall soon have nothing to investigate.

CURME: Syntax is important. Various features of New England syntax may be traced back to usage in southeastern England. Syntax is important because it shows the connection of American dialects with the dialects of definite parts of England.

MOORE: The difference of opinion between Kenyon and Edgerton is fundamental. In his opinion, foreign pronunciations are much more rarely borrowed than foreign words.

CARRUTHERS: supported Edgerton on the basis of his own experience. After three years of residence in southern England he was accepted as a Britisher, but shortly after his return to Canada he dropped all the acquired pronunciations.

HANLEY: agreed with Kenyon. Careful investigation is needed first of all for pronunciation; on the other three points evidence can be

taken down by almost anybody. Moved that the primary emphasis be placed on pronunciation.

KENT and MOORE: called for a vote on the comparative importance of the four features.

BLOOMFIELD: This is an impossible question to vote on. The European atlases are fundamentally unsound, and fail to give a picture of the dialects, because they are made by 'pre-view'. We cannot predict what will be of interest. The ideal is to send out a man for the summer, preferably a native of the region, and have him bring back several hundred pages of text, some phonograph records, and scattered information. From that ideal we must cut down, but not by prejudgment-not by forcing the subject to pronounce a word like wharf which may not exist in his natural dialect. (Bloomfield pronounces it warf, because he knows it only through speakers who use that pronunciation, though in all other wh-words he uses the unvoiced sound.)

BUCK: Though only 10% of the total material gathered may be in syntax, it may be no less important. No definite valuation is possible. JENKINS: agreed with Buck. Prejudgment of the relative importance of the four items is bad. Even the four headings do not cover everything, as for instance word order. It would be bad to neglect vocabulary. In tracing the word abeille in the French Atlas, new and interesting facts were found. EDGERTON, in answer to the objection that vocabulary shifts too much to be studied: The investigator should use his intelligence, and make sure whether the word is native or imported.

KURATH: Some of the most striking differences between class dialects are to be found in morphology. Intonation is of importance regionally. These phases of speech cannot be neglected. It would be premature to pass on the relative importance of the various items at this time.

HANLEY: phrased the motion as follows: It is the sense of this meeting that the primary emphasis in the Dialect Atlas should be on pronunciation, except in so far as discrimination of class dialects involves morphology, syntax, and vocabulary.

RUSSELL: This motion is flexible, and will allow the Committee to vary the emphasis considerably, providing only that pronunciation be the last feature to be trimmed down.

Motion carried by a vote of 28 to 11.

JENKINS: I am not against pronunciation, but against direction of any

IV. What is to be the primary purpose of the project? Is it to
determine the distribution of dialectic features already observed
by scholars, or is it to discover variations that are not known
to exist?


BRYAN: moved that the answer be both. LONG: This answer dodges the issue. In the beginning the investigators must concentrate on the first, later they may discover as yet unknown variations. Moved that we devote ourselves primarily to the first purpose.

KURATH: agreed with Long. First of all we must hunt for things which we suspect are there; incidentally we shall discover unknown variations.

HOPKINS: recommended that a thorough study be first made of one section.

BRYAN: A provisional investigation should first be made in a half dozen centers. In this manner the significant variations that are not known now would be discovered. To separate the two purposes mentioned would waste time.

YOUNG: The first aspect will be primary in point of time; the second aspect may prove to be primary in point of interest. KURATH: In gathering the material for the dialect maps of Italy a large questionnaire was first used in certain key positions of the various areas, partly to give the investigator better knowledge of the local dialect, and partly to help him in singling out the significant variations. This procedure enabled the investigator to do the other places in the same region more quickly, because he knew what to look for. A similar method would be advantageous in this country too.

LONG'S and BRYAN's motions were combined and carried: It is the sense of the conference that both the known and the unknown dialectic features be considered, but that attention be primarily devoted to determining the distribution of known features.

V. How should the central depot for the preservation of records

be organized?

KRAPP: For the preservation of phonograph records and all other material an elaborate center is needed. All records must be catalogued. There must be a phonetics laboratory. A good library should be accessible. The center should therefore be at a university which is prepared to support the Atlas to a considerable extent.

Universities should be approached, and the best bid accepted. The management should be in the hands of the local professor who is interested in the subject.

PROKOSCH: In 1915, an attempt was made to start an Archive of Records of American Dialect Speech, and there was much encouragement from the universities, until the War put a stop to the project. The actual work on the Atlas should be done at a university, but the records should go to some national institution like the Smithsonian Institution.

KURATH: The disadvantage of placing the records in the Smithsonian Institution would be that but few could go there to study them extensively. It is desirable to have them at a university with a large graduate school, where they could be studied extensively year after year. The bulk of the material would be published in map

form. STURTEVANT: The manager of the collection could not be a part-time worker, as much of the work on the Atlas must be done at the central location, and the work of tabulation will be immense. University jealousies would be avoided by putting the records in a national institution, but that point should be decided by the Committee. The meaning of Question V is: What kind of workers shall we have in the central depot?

MÜLLER: The Italian dialect material was

home in Switzerland, on millions of cards.

gathered in one man's There was only one copy

of each card. More than one copy should be provided. FLETCHER: Pictures of the speakers might be desirable along with their words, i.e., a 'talkie' equipment could be used. This would be much more expensive, to be sure.

AYRES: A movie news company has offered to take a film of some of the work; though publicity is hard to control and the movie may turn out strangely, we ought to have it taken, because it will serve to stimulate the popular interest in our project, which already exists in a large degree, and popular interest will in turn influence financial backers. It is desirable to get started, without waiting for our permanent program to be prepared.

RUSSELL: moved that preservation of be stricken from Question V because it is rather a question of using and interpreting the records.-The finest example of a depot of this kind is the Phonogramm-Archiv in Vienna. A university is the best place for it. Copies of the records can be sent to scholars elsewhere. Records would be 'buried' at the

« ZurückWeiter »