Finding the boundaries of linguistic variants and studying transitions between variants are key interests in classical linguistic geography. However, the definition of boundaries in areal linguistics is vague, and a quantitative characterization of transitions at the interface between dialectal variants is missing. We conceptualize these transitions as gradients, aiming to quantitatively account for the transition patterns which are traditionally only implicitly inferred from visualizations. Fitting of logistic functions in different spatial scopes (profiles as well as surfaces) is proposed as an approach to model the transition at the interface between the dominant usage areas of dialectal variants. Logistic functions can accommodate the breadth of boundary concepts, ranging from sharp isoglosses to transitions with different gradualities. The parameters of the fitted logistic models as well as supplementary measures then allow for the quantitative characterization and comparison of transitions across variables. To demonstrate the proposed methodology, we use Swiss German syntactic data on dialectal variables with a single transition zone.

In this paper we deal with the spatial distribution of 16 linguistic features known to vary between Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian. We perform our analyses on a dataset of geo-encoded Twitter status messages collected in the period from mid-2013 to the end of 2016. We perform two types of analyses. The first one finds boundaries in the spatial distribution of the linguistic variable levels through the kernel density estimation smoothing technique. These boundaries are then plotted over the state borders for a visual comparison. The second analysis deals with linguistic distance between the states. The groupings of linguistic variables and countries are calculated given the state borders and the Jensen-Shannon divergence between distributions of the 16 variables within each state. This analysis is completed with a measure of variable consistency for each country. These analyses are intended to show the extent to which current state borders correspond to linguistic boundaries. They suggest that Croatia and Serbia still represent the two extremes, reflecting a history of normative divergences, while Bosnia-Herzegovina and Montenegro, depending on the variable, lean to one or the other side.

This article extends previous analyses on (ay) and (aw) raising in Yami, an endangered Austronesian language spoken on Orchid Island, Taiwan. Two patterns of (ay) and (aw) variation co-exist in Yami—the more conservative/unraised variants and the innovative/raised forms—each of which indexes an authentic regional identity. Results from recent data suggest that Yami has undergone significant changes in just one generation as the raised variants are now preferred by younger islanders and have started permeating through non-raising areas. Traumatic shifts in the ecological context on Orchid Island help explain this sound change. Economically, rapid shift from fishing/farming to tourism trades promotes daily face-to-face communications among younger islanders, which has catalyzed the spread of nucleus raising to non-raising areas. Sociopsychologically, ongoing intergroup conflicts between islanders and mainland Taiwanese may further trigger the sound change, altering nucleus raising into a new communal system which highlights Yami identity in opposition to Others.

This article describes the influence of various basemaps in Perceptual Dialectology, on the national and state levels. The 180 perceptual maps of the United States and Tennessee were divided into six types of basemaps; tabulated results show that basemaps play a different role on the national and state level. On the national level, basemaps that have features reminiscent of boundaries (state lines or interstates) bias the respondents’ answers. On the state level, on the other hand, the map features do not seem to influence the results in any discernible way: at times the informants seemingly go against the details present on the basemap. This striking difference indicates that, though the respondents rely on basemap details at the national level, where they may not have enough experience with the whole country, they don’t pay much attention to the state-level basemap details as they follow their own more detailed ideas about perceptions.