dialect continuum

Question

0 This is an interesting topic in my opinion but I haven't found a clear, if there is even one, answer to the problem that arises in dialect continuum, for example. Mutual intelligibility is the criterion of defining a language. So, let's say that we have numbers from 1 to 10, each number represents a dialect, and mutual intteligibility is greater with numbers close to each other, that is 1 and 2 are mutually intelligible; 1 and 3 are also mutually intelligible, though not so much as 1 and 2. When we get to number 10, mutual intelligibility is lost with 1 and 10. That's fine: we have two different languages. But how about number 5 which is mutually intelligible with both 1 and 10? With how many languages are we dealing here actually?0-

Marvin A. · Accepted Answer

0 It's fairly arbitrary how you divide them up.  It depends more on which of those varieties have a navy. 0-

Forbes · Answer

0One view to take is that there are no languages, only dialects. If you do that, your problem disappears.02br
02br
00It's a bit like like colours. You can think of pink and red as different colours, or pink as being a shade of red. But if you think of pink as a shade of red then what you think of as "red" is also a shade of red, since "red" includes not only pink, but what you think of as red. So, from one perspective there is no such thing as red, only shades of red. But from another pespective there is such a thing as red, since it is definitely not yellow or blue.02br
02br
00Substituting "languages" and "dialects" for "colours" and "shades" we get:02br
02br
00You can think of Asturian and Spanish as different languages, or Asturian as being a dialect of Spanish. But if you think of Asturian as a dialect of Spanish then what you think of as "Spanish" is also a dialect of Spanish, since "Spanish" includes not only Asturian, but what you think of as Spanish. So, from one perspective there is no such thing as Spanish, only dialects of Spanish. But from another pespective there is such a thing as Spanish, since it is definitely not German or Albanian.02br
02br
00It all goes to show how difficult it is to classify things.0-

Kimm · Answer

0 In addition to what Forbes has said about classification - the gist of which I agree with and the problems of which linguistic typologists have struggled with - I would maintain that the only linguistic realities are idiolects. Wild as it may sound, there really is no such thing as 01i00the02i00 English language or even 01i00the02i00 Glasgow dialect. What we have, if we look at it with an open mind, is a collection of individuals whose systems of rules - for want of a better word - governing language more or less correspond. Any boundaries one draws between varieties - to introduce a more neutral term - are linguistically arbitrary and socio-politically motivated. Of course, this in no way diminishes the worth of socio-linguistics. Language is, after all, a social phenomenon.02br
02br
00/km0-

Forbes · Answer

0One can go further than saying that there are only idiolects by pointing out that an individual's language changes over time. The problem with taking arguments to their logical conclusion is that you may get to a point where your conclusion is either absurd, or at the very least, unhelpful. But taking arguments to their logical conclusion can help to clarify the question you are looking into, even if the clarification is only to realise how tricky the question is or to bring home the limits of human reasoning.02br
02br
00Classification is useful, and indeed often necessary, so long as you realise its limitations and accept that different classifications of the same phenomena may be needed for different purposes and maintain vigilance.0-

dialect continuum

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions