De la variación tipológica a la variación intralingüística (y viceversa)el caso de los familectos

  1. Antonio Benítez-Burraco 1
  2. Elena Felíu-Arquiola 2
  1. 1 Universidad de Sevilla
    info

    Universidad de Sevilla

    Sevilla, España

    ROR https://ror.org/03yxnpp24

  2. 2 Universidad de Jaén
    info

    Universidad de Jaén

    Jaén, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0122p5f64

Revista:
Revista Española de Lingüística

ISSN: 2254-8769

Ano de publicación: 2024

Volume: 54

Número: 1

Páxinas: 9-28

Tipo: Artigo

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Outras publicacións en: Revista Española de Lingüística

Resumo

Sociolinguistic typology studies have uncovered diverse social, cultural, and political factors that might account for aspects of the structural complexity of the world’s languages. Accordingly, the languages spoken by close-knit (or esoteric) societies tend to feature more complex phonologies and morphologies, as well as increased semantic opacity. By contrast, the languages spoken by open (or exoteric) societies usually exhibit more syntactic comple-xity together with greater semantic compositionality. In this paper, we support the view that classical (i.e. variationist) sociolinguistics would benefit from applying this typological approach to the study of intralinguistic variation. Specifically, we argue for relying on the concepts of esotericity and exotericity for achieving a better characterization and unders-tanding of Spanish familects (i.e. the private language varieties used within families). We advance a specific protocol for studying this linguistic variety, as well as a tentative list of features characterizing Spanish familects, which we have posited under the view that familects are esoteric varieties of the standard language, although with some distinctive features compared to the oral vernacular, particularly to informal speech.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Beaumont, S. L. (1995). Adolescent girls’ conversations with mothers and friends: A matter of style. Discourse Processes, 20(1), 109-132.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539509544933
  • Benítez-Burraco, A., y Kempe, V. (2018). The emergence of modern languages: Has human self-domestication optimized language transmission? Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 551. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00551
  • Benítez-Burraco, A., y Progovac, L. (2020). A four-stage model for language evolution under the effects of human self-domestication. Language & Communication, 73, 1–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2020.03.002
  • Bolender, J. (2007). Prehistoric cognition by description: a Russellian approach to the upper Paleolithic. Biology & Philosophy, 22, 383–399.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10539-006-9058-2
  • Burrell, N. A. (1995). Communication patterns in stepfamilies: Redefining family roles, themes, and conflict styles. En M. Fitzpatrick y A. Vangelisti (Eds.). Explaining family interactions (pp. 290-309). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Conti Jiménez, C. (2018). Complejidad lingüística: Orígenes y Revisión Crítica del Concepto de Lengua Compleja. Berna: Peter Lang.
  • Chen, S., Gil, D., Gaponov, S., Reifegerste, J., Yuditha, T., Tatarinova, T. V., Progovac, L., y Benítez-Burraco, A. (2023, May 17). Linguistic and memory correlates of societal variation: A quantitative analysis. doi: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/bnz2s
  • Chen, S., Gil, D., Gaponov, S., Reifegerste, J., Yuditha, T., Tatarinova, T. V., Progovac, L., y Benítez-Burraco, A. (2024). Linguistic correlates of societal variation: A quantitative analysis. PLoS ONE, 19(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0300838
  • Clancy, B. (2016). Investigating intimate discourse. Exploring the spoken interaction of families, couples and friends. Londres: Routledge.
  • Dahl, Ö. (2015, Mayo 1-3). How WEIRD are WALS languages? [Conference presentation abstract]. Diversity Linguistics – Retrospects and Prospects, Leipzig.
  • https://www.eva.mpg.de/fileadmin/content_files/linguistics/conferences/2015-diversity-linguistics/Dahl_slides.pdf
  • Díaz-Campos, M. (Ed.). (2011). The Handbook of Hispanic Sociolinguistics. Malden, MA: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Díaz-Campos, M., Escalona Torres, J. M., y Filimonova, V. (2020). Sociolinguistics of the Spanish-Speaking World. Annual Review of Linguistics, 6(1), 363-388.
  • doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030547
  • Dryer, M. S., y Haspelmath, M. (Eds.). (2013). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
  • http://wals.info
  • Eberhard, D. M., Simons, G. F., y Fennig, C. D. (Eds.). (2022). Ethnologue: Languages of the World (twenty-fifth edition). Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com
  • Ehret, K., Berdicevskis, A., Bentz, C., y Blumenthal-Dramé, A. (2023). Measuring language complexity: challenges and opportunities. Linguistics Vanguard, 9(1), 1-8.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2022-0133
  • Everett, D. (2005). Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã: Another look at the design features of human language. Current Anthropology, 46(4), 621–646.
  • Fletcher, P., y MacWhinney, B. (Eds.). (1995). The Handbook of Child Language. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Foulkes, P., Docherty, G. J., y Watt, D. (2005). Phonological variation in child-directed speech. Language, 81(1), 177-206. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4489857
  • Gil D. (2021). Tense-aspect-mood marking, language-family size and the evolution of predication. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 376, 20200194. doi: http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2020.0194
  • Gordon, C. (2009). Making meanings, creating family: Intertextuality and framing in family interaction. Nueva York: Oxford University Press.
  • Halliday, M. A. K. (1976). Anti‐languages. American Anthropologist, 78(3), 570-584. http://www.jstor.org/stable/674418
  • Hammarström, H., Forkel, R., Haspelmath, M., y Bank, S. (2022). Glottolog 4.6. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6578297 (Available online at http://glottolog.org).
  • Hazen, K. (2004). The Family. En K. Chambers, P. Trudgill, y N. Schilling-Estes (Eds.). The Handbook of Language Variation and Change (pp. 500-525). Malden, MA.: Blackwell. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756591.ch20
  • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., y Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
  • Joseph, J. E. (2021). Why does language complexity resist measurement? Frontiers in Communication, 6, 624855. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.624855
  • Kempe, V., Brooks, P. J., Gillis, S., y Samson, G. (2007). Diminutives facilitate word segmentation in natural speech: cross-linguistic evidence. Memory & Cognition, 35(4), 762–773. doi: https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193313
  • Kirby, K. R., Gray, R. D., Greenhill, S. J., Jordan, F. M., Gomes-Ng, S., Bibiko, H. J., et al. (2016). D-PLACE: A global database of cultural, linguistic and environmental diversity. PloS One, 11(7), e0158391. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0158391
  • Lupyan, G., y Dale, R. (2010). Language structure is partly determined by social structure. PLoS One 5(1): e8559. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0008559
  • Lust, B. C. (2006). Child Language: Acquisition and Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Majid, A. (2023). Establishing psychological universals. Nature Reviews Psychology, 2, 199–200. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-023-00169-w
  • Miestamo, M. (2017). Linguistic diversity and complexity. Lingue e Linguaggio, 16(2), 227-253. doi: https://doi.org/10.1418/88241
  • Osovska, I. M. (2019). Lexical-semantic space of the German family discourse. En V. D. Bialyk, L. I. Didukh, M. Yu. Ivanchenko, et al. (Eds.). Efficiency level and the necessity of influence of philological sciences on the development of language and literature: collective monograph (pp. 123-144). LvivToruń: Liha-Pres.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.36059/978-966-397-170-4/123-144
  • Roberts, J. (2013). Child language variation. En J. K. Chambers y N. Schilling (Eds.). The Handbook of Language Variation and Change (pp. 263-276). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwel. doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch12
  • Saint-Georges, C., Chetouani, M., Cassel, R., Apicella, F., Mahdhaoui, A., Muratori, F., Laznik, M. C., y Cohen, D. (2013). Motherese in interaction: at the cross-road of emotion and cognition? (A systematic review). PloS One, 8(10), e78103.
  • doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0078103
  • Schick, J., Fryns, C., Wegdell, F., Laporte, M., Zuberbühler, K., van Schaik, C. P., et al. (2022). The function and evolution of child-directed communication. PLoS Biology, 20(5), e3001630. doi: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3001630
  • Silva-Corvalán, C. (2001). Sociolingüística y pragmática del español. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
  • Skirgård, H., Haynie, H. J., Blasi, D. E., Hammarström, H., Collins, J., Latarche, J. J., et al. (2023). Grambank reveals the importance of genealogical constraints on linguistic diversity and highlights the impact of language loss. Science Advances, 9(16), eadg6175. doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adg6175
  • Søndegaard, B. (1991). Switching between seven codes within one family—a linguistic resource. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 12(1-2), 85-92. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.1991.9994448
  • Storch, A. (2017). Typology of secret languages and linguistic taboos. En A. Y. Aikhenvald y R. M. W. Dixon (Eds.). The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Typology (pp. 287-322.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • doi: https://10.1017/9781316135716.010
  • Szmrecsanyi, B. (2015). Recontextualizing language complexity. En J. Daems, E. Zenner, K. Heylen, D. Speelman, y H. Cuyckens (Eds.) Change of paradigms - new paradoxes: Recontextualizing language and linguistics (pp. 347-360). Berlín: De Gruyter Mouton. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110435597-020
  • Thurston, W. R. (1987). Processes of change in the languages of north-western New Britain. Canberra: Dept. of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University.
  • Thurston, W. R. (1994). Renovation and innovation in the languages of north-western New Britain. En T. Dutton y D. T. Tryon (Eds.). Language Contact and Change in the Austronesian World (pp. 573–609). Berlín: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Varenne, H. (1987). Talk and real talk: the voices of silence and the voices of power in American family life. Cultural Anthropology, 2(3), 369-394.
  • Wray, A., y Grace, G. W. (2007). The consequences of talking to strangers: Evolutionary corollaries of socio-cultural influences on linguistic form. Lingua, 117, 543-578. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.05.005
Fonte de datos: Dialnet