Journal of Linguistics Research
Research Article
PDF BibTex RIS Cite

Halaççada Etnodilbilimsel Ağ Canlılığı Alanı (ZonES): Bir Dilin Tehlikeye Girmesini Saptamak için Model

Year 2022, Volume: 33 Issue: 2, 221 - 245, 31.12.2022

Mehmet AKKUŞ Çiğdem SAĞIN ŞİMŞEK

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1126225

Abstract

Toplumdilbilim alanında, toplumsal ağ ve etnodilbilimsel canlılık konuları şimdiye kadar farklı konuşma toplulukları ve katılımcı profilleri ile çeşitli dil kümelerinde ayrı ayrı incelenmiştir. Ancak, ilgili alanyazında sosyal ağ ve etnodilbilimsel canlılık arasındaki etkileşimin yok olma tehlikesi altındaki dillere odaklanan çalışmaların sayısı göreceli olarak azdır. Bu çalışma, (toplumsal ağ ve etnodilbilimsel canlılık kuramlarını içeren) karma bir model önermektedir. Bu doğrultuda, bu çalışma toplumsal ağların oluşumu veya sürdürülmesinde dil canlılığı ile dil kullanımı arasındaki etkileşimini odağına alarak, 26 çok dilli Halaçça-Farsça katılımcıyı inceleyerek söz konusu çok dilli ortamda oluşup oluşmadığını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmadaki veriler yarı yapılandırılmış görüşmeler, alan araştırması notları ve dil kullanım anketi yoluyla toplanmıştır. Katılımcılar yaşlarına göre üç kuşak grubuna (yaşlı, orta yaşlı ve genç) ayrılmış ve böylece kuşağın etkisinin ortaya çıkartılması hedeflenmiştir. Çalışma verilerinden elde edilen bulgular, toplumsal ağ oluşturma aşamasında dil kullanımı ve toplumsal etkenlerin dilin tehlikeye girmesini öngörmesi açısından etnodilbilimsel canlılık bağlamında yakın bir ilişki olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Kuşaklararası analiz ise, daha yaşlı katılımcıların mümkün olduğunca Halaçça konuşan bireylerle birlikte miras dillerini, yani Halaççayı kullanmaya daha meyilli olduklarına; genç katılımcıların ise sosyal ağlarında ağırlıklı olarak Farsça kullanmaya eğilimli olduklarına işaret etmektedir.

Keywords

Halaçça, etnodilbilimsel ağ canlılığı alanı, alan araştırması, tehlike altındaki dil(ler)

Supporting Institution

Destekleyen kurum bulunmamaktadır.

References

  • Akkuş, M. (2022). Lexical copies in Khalaj: A contribution to the World Loanword Database (WOLD). Turkic Languages, 26, 36–57.
  • Akkuş, M. & Sağın Şimşek, Ç. (2021, April 29-30). Tehlike altındaki bir dil olarak Lazca konuşurlarının dil tercihleri ve toplumsal ağları arasındaki ilişkinin dilin canlılığı üzerindeki etkileri [Paper presentation]. 34. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Allard, R. & Landry, R. (1992). Ethnolinguistic vitality beliefs and language maintenance and loss. Maintenance and Loss of Minority Languages, 1, 171-195. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.1.14all
  • Blake, R. &. & Josey, M. (2003). The /ay/ diphthong in a Martha’s Vineyard community: What can we say 40 years after Labov? Language in Society, 32, 451-485. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404503324017
  • Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: a road map from beginning to end. SAGE Publications.
  • Bosnalı, S. (2016). Değinim durumundaki azınlık dillerinin sürdürümü. Border Crossing, 6(2), 292–304.
  • Bourhis, R. Y. (1979). Language and ethnic interaction: A social psychological approach. In H. Giles & B. Saint-Jacques (Eds.) Language and ethnic relations (pp. 117-141). Pergamon.
  • Chambers, J.K. (2013). Patterns of variation including change. In J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.) The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 297-324). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch14
  • Clark, V. L. P., Creswell, J. W., Denise, O. G., & Shope, R. J. (2008). Mixing quantitative and qualitative approaches: an introduction to emergent mixed methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (eds.) Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 363-387). The Guilford Press.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications.
  • Doerfer, G. (1971). Khalaj materials. Indiana University Press.
  • Doerfer, G. (1987). Lexik und Sprachgeographie des Chaladsch. 2 Volumes. Harrassowitz.
  • Doerfer, G. (1988). Grammatik des Chaladsch (Turcologica 4). Harrassowitz.
  • Eckert, P. (1989). Jocks and burnouts: social categories and identity in the high school. Teachers College Press.
  • Eckert, P. (2000). Language variation as social practice: The linguistic construction of identity in Belten High. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Edwards, V. (1986). Language in a black community. Multilingual Matters.
  • Edwards, W. F. (1992). Sociolinguistic behavior in a Detroit inner-city black neighborhood. Language in Society, 21(1), 93-115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015050
  • Ehala, M. (2010). Refining the notion of ethnolinguistic vitality. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7(4), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790711003637094
  • Ehala, M. (2015). Ethnolinguistic vitality. In T. Karen (Ed.) The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp. 1-7) John Wiley & Sons.
  • Evans, B. (2004). The role of social network in the acquisition of local dialect norms by Appalachian migrants in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Language Variation and Change, 16(2), 153-167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394504162042
  • Ferguson, C. A. (1972). Diglossia. In P. P. Giglioli (Ed.) Language and social context (pp. 232-251). Penguin.
  • Fishman, J. A., Cooper, R. L., & Ma, R. (1971). Bilingualism in the Barrio. Indian University Press.
  • Gal, S. (1978). Peasant men can't get wives: Language change and sex roles in a bilingual community. Language in Society, 7(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005303
  • Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y. & Taylor, D. N. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations. In H. Giles (Ed.) Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 307-348). Academic Press.
  • Hatami Khajeh, B. (2013). İran'da Yaşayan Halaç Türklerinin Sosyo-Kültürel Yapısı. [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University.
  • Hulsen, M., Bot, K. de & Weltens, B. (2002). “Between two worlds”. Social networks, language shift, and language processing in three generations of Dutch migrants in New Zealand. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.004
  • Johanson, L. (2021). Turkic. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016704
  • Landry, R. & Allard, R. (1994). Diglossia, ethnolinguistic vitality, and language behavior. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 108, 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1994.108.15
  • Li Wei (1995). Variations in patterns of language choice and codeswitching by three groups of Chinese/English speakers in Newcastle upon Tyne. Multilingua 14(3), 297-323. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1995.14.3.297
  • Matsumoto, Kazuko 2010 The role of social networks in the post-colonial multilingual island of Palau: Mechanisms of language maintenance and shift. Multilingua, 29(2). 133−165.
  • Middle age (2022, September 5). In Merriam-Webster’s dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/medium%20age
  • Milroy, L. & Llamas, C. (2013). Social networks. In J.K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.) The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 409-427). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch19
  • Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1978). Belfast: Change and variation in an urban vernacular. In P. Trudgill (Ed.) Sociolinguistic patterns in British English (pp. 19-36). Arnold.
  • Milroy, L. & Wei, L. (1995). A social network approach to code-switching. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (Eds.) One speaker, Two languages (pp. 136-157). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620867.007
  • Polinsky, M. (2018). Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge University Press.
  • Rahimi, M. (2020). Dil canlılığı bağlamında Halaç Türklerinin durumu. Modern Türklük Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17, 131-145.
  • Raschka, C., Li W. & Lee, S. (2002). Bilingual development and social networks of British-born Chinese children. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 9-25. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.007
  • Russell, J. (1982). Networks and sociolinguistic variation in an African urban setting. In S. Romaine (Ed.) Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities (pp. 125-140). Arnold.
  • Sachdev, I., Bourhis, R. Y., Phang, S., & D’Eye, J. (1987). Language attitudes and vitality perceptions: Intergenerational effects amongst Chinese Canadian communities. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 6, 287-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X8763009
  • Sallabank, J. (2010). The role of social networks in endangered language maintenance and revitalization: The case of Guernesiais in the Channel Islands. Anthropological Linguistics, 52(2), 184-205.
  • Schmidt, A. (1985). Young people’s Dyirbal. Cambridge University Press.
  • Stoessel, S. (2002). Investigating the role of social networks in language maintenance and shift. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 93-131. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.006
  • Tribur, Z. (2017). Social network structure and language change in Amdo Tibetan. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 245, 169−206.
  • UN [United Nations Population Division] (2022, September 5). Personal correspondence with Marybeth Weinberger, Chief, Population and Development Section, January 2001. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/expert-group/1/index.asp
  • Velázquez, Isabel 2013 Mother’s social network and family language maintenance. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(2). 189−202.
  • Yagmur, K. (1997). First language attrition among Turkish speakers in Sydney. Tilburg University Press.
  • Yagmur, K. (2009). Language use and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish compared with the Dutch in The Netherlands. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 30(3), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630802369445
  • Yagmur, K. & Akinci, M. A. (2003). Language use, choice, maintenance and Ethnolinguistic Vitality of Turkish speakers in France: Intergenerational differences. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 164, 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2003.050
  • Yagmur, K., Bot, K. de, Korzilius, H. (1999). Language attrition, language shift and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20(1), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434639908666369
  • Yagmur, K. & Kroon, S. (2003). Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and language revitalisation in Bashkortostan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24(4), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666504
  • Yagmur, K. & Kroon, S. (2006). Objective and subjective data on Altai and Kazakh ethnolinguistic vitality in the Russian Federation Republic of Altai. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 27(3), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630608668778
  • Yağmur, K., & Bayram Jacobs, D. (2015). Language maintenance and shift patterns of the Turkish speakers in the Netherlands. bilig Journal of Social Sciences of the Turkish World, 74, 261-286.

The Zone of Ethnolinguistic Social Networking (ZonES) in Khalaj Turkic: A Model for Language Endangerment

Year 2022, Volume: 33 Issue: 2, 221 - 245, 31.12.2022

Mehmet AKKUŞ Çiğdem SAĞIN ŞİMŞEK

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1126225

Abstract

Social network and ethnolinguistic vitality have been separately studied in various language constellations with different speech communities and participant profiles so far. However, studies focusing on the interplay between social networks and ethnolinguistic vitality are quite scarce, even though the number of endangered languages is increasing in number. Adopting a mixed-hybrid model involving social network theory and ethnolinguistic vitality, this study aims to investigate whether the interplay between language vitality and language use in constructing or maintaining social networks could be observed in Khalaj-Persian by observing 26 multilingual Khalaj-Persian individuals. The data was collected through semi-structured interviews, field work notes, and a language use questionnaire. The effect of generational difference was also manipulated by dividing the participants into three generation groups (older, middle-aged, and younger) based on their ages. The findings revealed that there was an intimate relation between language use in networking and ethnolinguistic vitality for predicting language endangerment with its limitations. The intergenerational analysis showed that the older participants were more inclined to use their heritage language, i.e., Khalaj, with Khalaj-speaking individuals whenever possible, while the younger participants tended to use Persian predominantly in their social networks.

Keywords

Khalaj, zone of ethnolinguistic networking vitality, field work, endangered language(s)

References

  • Akkuş, M. (2022). Lexical copies in Khalaj: A contribution to the World Loanword Database (WOLD). Turkic Languages, 26, 36–57.
  • Akkuş, M. & Sağın Şimşek, Ç. (2021, April 29-30). Tehlike altındaki bir dil olarak Lazca konuşurlarının dil tercihleri ve toplumsal ağları arasındaki ilişkinin dilin canlılığı üzerindeki etkileri [Paper presentation]. 34. Ulusal Dilbilim Kurultayı, Middle East Technical University, Ankara, Turkey.
  • Allard, R. & Landry, R. (1992). Ethnolinguistic vitality beliefs and language maintenance and loss. Maintenance and Loss of Minority Languages, 1, 171-195. https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.1.14all
  • Blake, R. &. & Josey, M. (2003). The /ay/ diphthong in a Martha’s Vineyard community: What can we say 40 years after Labov? Language in Society, 32, 451-485. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404503324017
  • Bloomberg, L. D. & Volpe, M. (2019). Completing your qualitative dissertation: a road map from beginning to end. SAGE Publications.
  • Bosnalı, S. (2016). Değinim durumundaki azınlık dillerinin sürdürümü. Border Crossing, 6(2), 292–304.
  • Bourhis, R. Y. (1979). Language and ethnic interaction: A social psychological approach. In H. Giles & B. Saint-Jacques (Eds.) Language and ethnic relations (pp. 117-141). Pergamon.
  • Chambers, J.K. (2013). Patterns of variation including change. In J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.) The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 297-324). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch14
  • Clark, V. L. P., Creswell, J. W., Denise, O. G., & Shope, R. J. (2008). Mixing quantitative and qualitative approaches: an introduction to emergent mixed methods research. In S. N. Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (eds.) Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 363-387). The Guilford Press.
  • Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications.
  • Doerfer, G. (1971). Khalaj materials. Indiana University Press.
  • Doerfer, G. (1987). Lexik und Sprachgeographie des Chaladsch. 2 Volumes. Harrassowitz.
  • Doerfer, G. (1988). Grammatik des Chaladsch (Turcologica 4). Harrassowitz.
  • Eckert, P. (1989). Jocks and burnouts: social categories and identity in the high school. Teachers College Press.
  • Eckert, P. (2000). Language variation as social practice: The linguistic construction of identity in Belten High. Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Edwards, V. (1986). Language in a black community. Multilingual Matters.
  • Edwards, W. F. (1992). Sociolinguistic behavior in a Detroit inner-city black neighborhood. Language in Society, 21(1), 93-115. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015050
  • Ehala, M. (2010). Refining the notion of ethnolinguistic vitality. International Journal of Multilingualism, 7(4), 363-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790711003637094
  • Ehala, M. (2015). Ethnolinguistic vitality. In T. Karen (Ed.) The international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp. 1-7) John Wiley & Sons.
  • Evans, B. (2004). The role of social network in the acquisition of local dialect norms by Appalachian migrants in Ypsilanti, Michigan. Language Variation and Change, 16(2), 153-167. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394504162042
  • Ferguson, C. A. (1972). Diglossia. In P. P. Giglioli (Ed.) Language and social context (pp. 232-251). Penguin.
  • Fishman, J. A., Cooper, R. L., & Ma, R. (1971). Bilingualism in the Barrio. Indian University Press.
  • Gal, S. (1978). Peasant men can't get wives: Language change and sex roles in a bilingual community. Language in Society, 7(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500005303
  • Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y. & Taylor, D. N. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations. In H. Giles (Ed.) Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 307-348). Academic Press.
  • Hatami Khajeh, B. (2013). İran'da Yaşayan Halaç Türklerinin Sosyo-Kültürel Yapısı. [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Hacettepe University.
  • Hulsen, M., Bot, K. de & Weltens, B. (2002). “Between two worlds”. Social networks, language shift, and language processing in three generations of Dutch migrants in New Zealand. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 27-52. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.004
  • Johanson, L. (2021). Turkic. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781139016704
  • Landry, R. & Allard, R. (1994). Diglossia, ethnolinguistic vitality, and language behavior. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 108, 15-42. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1994.108.15
  • Li Wei (1995). Variations in patterns of language choice and codeswitching by three groups of Chinese/English speakers in Newcastle upon Tyne. Multilingua 14(3), 297-323. https://doi.org/10.1515/mult.1995.14.3.297
  • Matsumoto, Kazuko 2010 The role of social networks in the post-colonial multilingual island of Palau: Mechanisms of language maintenance and shift. Multilingua, 29(2). 133−165.
  • Middle age (2022, September 5). In Merriam-Webster’s dictionary. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/medium%20age
  • Milroy, L. & Llamas, C. (2013). Social networks. In J.K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.) The handbook of language variation and change (pp. 409-427). Blackwell Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch19
  • Milroy, J. & Milroy, L. (1978). Belfast: Change and variation in an urban vernacular. In P. Trudgill (Ed.) Sociolinguistic patterns in British English (pp. 19-36). Arnold.
  • Milroy, L. & Wei, L. (1995). A social network approach to code-switching. In L. Milroy & P. Muysken (Eds.) One speaker, Two languages (pp. 136-157). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620867.007
  • Polinsky, M. (2018). Heritage languages and their speakers. Cambridge University Press.
  • Rahimi, M. (2020). Dil canlılığı bağlamında Halaç Türklerinin durumu. Modern Türklük Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17, 131-145.
  • Raschka, C., Li W. & Lee, S. (2002). Bilingual development and social networks of British-born Chinese children. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 9-25. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.007
  • Russell, J. (1982). Networks and sociolinguistic variation in an African urban setting. In S. Romaine (Ed.) Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities (pp. 125-140). Arnold.
  • Sachdev, I., Bourhis, R. Y., Phang, S., & D’Eye, J. (1987). Language attitudes and vitality perceptions: Intergenerational effects amongst Chinese Canadian communities. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 6, 287-307. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X8763009
  • Sallabank, J. (2010). The role of social networks in endangered language maintenance and revitalization: The case of Guernesiais in the Channel Islands. Anthropological Linguistics, 52(2), 184-205.
  • Schmidt, A. (1985). Young people’s Dyirbal. Cambridge University Press.
  • Stoessel, S. (2002). Investigating the role of social networks in language maintenance and shift. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 153, 93-131. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2002.006
  • Tribur, Z. (2017). Social network structure and language change in Amdo Tibetan. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 245, 169−206.
  • UN [United Nations Population Division] (2022, September 5). Personal correspondence with Marybeth Weinberger, Chief, Population and Development Section, January 2001. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/events/expert-group/1/index.asp
  • Velázquez, Isabel 2013 Mother’s social network and family language maintenance. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 34(2). 189−202.
  • Yagmur, K. (1997). First language attrition among Turkish speakers in Sydney. Tilburg University Press.
  • Yagmur, K. (2009). Language use and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish compared with the Dutch in The Netherlands. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 30(3), 219-233. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630802369445
  • Yagmur, K. & Akinci, M. A. (2003). Language use, choice, maintenance and Ethnolinguistic Vitality of Turkish speakers in France: Intergenerational differences. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 164, 107-128. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.2003.050
  • Yagmur, K., Bot, K. de, Korzilius, H. (1999). Language attrition, language shift and ethnolinguistic vitality of Turkish in Australia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 20(1), 51-69. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434639908666369
  • Yagmur, K. & Kroon, S. (2003). Ethnolinguistic vitality perceptions and language revitalisation in Bashkortostan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 24(4), 319-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630308666504
  • Yagmur, K. & Kroon, S. (2006). Objective and subjective data on Altai and Kazakh ethnolinguistic vitality in the Russian Federation Republic of Altai. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 27(3), 241-258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630608668778
  • Yağmur, K., & Bayram Jacobs, D. (2015). Language maintenance and shift patterns of the Turkish speakers in the Netherlands. bilig Journal of Social Sciences of the Turkish World, 74, 261-286.

Details

Primary Language English
Subjects Linguistics
Journal Section Research Articles
Authors

Mehmet AKKUŞ
ARTVİN ÇORUH ÜNİVERSİTESİ
0000-0002-9604-1418
Türkiye

Çiğdem SAĞIN ŞİMŞEK
ORTA DOĞU TEKNİK ÜNİVERSİTESİ, EĞİTİM FAKÜLTESİ
0000-0002-5234-7546
Türkiye

Publication Date December 31, 2022
Published in Issue Year 2022Volume: 33 Issue: 2

Cite

APA
AKKUŞ, M., & SAĞIN ŞİMŞEK, Ç. (2022). The Zone of Ethnolinguistic Social Networking (ZonES) in Khalaj Turkic: A Model for Language Endangerment. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 33(2), 221-245. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.1126225

88x31.png

This work is licensed under a

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 (CC BY-NC-ND) International License.


Journal DOI: 10.18492/dad