|
|
 E-mail this message to a friend
|
|
Title:
|
Lexical Variation of Chiangmai Dialect in Chiangmai Province in Thailand
|
|
Author:
|
Sudarat Hatfield
|
|
Email:
|
click here to access email
|
|
Degree Awarded:
|
University of Georgia
, Linguistics Program
|
|
Degree Date:
|
2005
|
|
Linguistic Subfield(s):
|
Sociolinguistics
Anthropological Linguistics
|
|
Subject Language(s):
|
Thai, Northern
|
|
Director(s):
|
William Kretzschmar, Jr.
Marlyse Baptista
Don McCreary
|
|
|
Abstract:
|
|
This research is a sociolinguistic study to find out whether there is
lexical variation in the Chiangmai dialect in Chiangmai province in
Thailand. It documents the differences of lexical use among the Chiangmai
people, considers whether social factors such as age, education, sex, and
urban/rural residence cause the differences. This project includes
thirty-six speakers spread across twenty-two districts (Amphurs) in
Chiangmai province. For each speaker, responses to two hundred and
eighty-nine different questions, or linguistic variables, are tabulated.
The results are analyzed separately in order to reveal the patterns of
variation by the variables of age, education, sex, and region. The
principal method is a questionnaire, which covers nine topics drawn from
daily life. Instead of using fixed questions aimed to elicit short
responses, the questionnaire was used as a guide for conversation. Tape
recordings of informal conversation were also made. Questionnaire responses
are transliterated in English Roman script to represent Chiangmai words
exactly as the Chiangmai people pronounce them. It was concluded that age
and education are two social factors that cause lexical variation among the
Chiangmai people. Sex is only a small factor in lexical variation. Region
is another social factor which causes lexical variation in the Chiangmai
dialect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page Updated: 26-Nov-2009
Please report any bad links or misclassified data
LINGUIST Homepage | Read
LINGUIST | Contact us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.
|
|
