Knowledge base · source

Fukazawa & Ono 2024

Fukazawa Mika 深澤美香 & Ono Yohei 小野洋平 (2024). 方言境界再考―アイヌ語の方言境界を例として―[Dialect boundaries reconsidered: Ainu dialect boundaries as a case study]. 北方言語研究 [Northern Language Studies] 14, 155–176.

prior-analysis general text held locally OCR pdftotext-pieces: 10 leaves, 0 with a printed page

Chapters citing this source

Sentences of the first edition citing this source

1. Fukazawa and Ono's 2024 study reconsiders those boundaries with additional data , and Kasuga's 2026 dialectometric analysis extends coverage to 75 localities ‹corpus-suggested›. no page The Dialect Sample and the Corpus-Quantification Method
2. takes a further methodological step: rather than assigning dialects to groups — which forces a decision about where "boundary dialects" belong — the framework selects a reference dialect, computes similarity from all other lects to that centre, and visualises each variety's "central-dialect-likeness" via correspondence analysis (対応分析) and projection pursuit (射影追跡法). no page Hokkaido Dialect Classification and Dialectometry
3. None of the isoglosses coincides precisely with the others, which is why prefer a framework of gradient boundary dialects over a partition into discrete named groups. no page Hokkaido Dialect Microvariation: Phonology and Morphosyntax
4. argue that such localities are better treated as reference points for measuring gradient similarity than as dialect members to be assigned to one group. no page Hokkaido Dialect Microvariation: Phonology and Morphosyntax
5. Fukazawa and Ono's 2024 paper takes a complementary methodological direction (). no page Lexical Dialectology and the Dialect Atlas
6. The internal Hokkaido classification and the dialectometry underlying that finding are treated in ; the boundary-dialect methodology is refined further by . no page Sakhalin and Kuril Ainu: The External Comparison