1. Islandora Repository
  2. Lund Corpora
  3. LACOLA
  4. Germanic
  5. Övdalian
  6. Conversations

Conversations

Conversation_17
17_6_R05_0021 : Free conversations, words ending in '-kall' (lit. 'man'). 17_6_R05_0022 : Associations for the words bjärr, gnaup, uol, sker, olmer 17_6_R05_0023 : Associations for the words sker, waik, åvå, aindje, måyre, fliuot, daike, steða, grav 17_6_R05_0024 : Associations for the words grav, bekk, å, öve, wassl, djyölu, and a few names., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_20
Conversation about directionals and the preposition 'yvyr'., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_26_a
Conversation about speaker's old job at the local store, and about differences between the vernacular in different villages., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_26_b
Conversation about life in the summer pastures (Sw. 'fäbodar'), fishing, and grass cutting., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_2_a
2_6_LS_30031 : Conversation about life in the summer pastures (Sw. 'fäbodar'), about cattle calls (Sw. 'kulning') 2_6_LS_30032 : Conversation about old and new words., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_2_b
2_10_R05_0018 : Associations for the words bjärr, gnaup, blik, lutu, steða, bokke 2_10_R05_0019 : Associations for the words sju, tienne, djyölu, luok, waik, åvå, bekk, å, öve 2_10_R05_0020 : Associations for the words sker, olme. The verbs rek/ną̊r 2_10_R05_0021 : Associations for the words måyre, skarpbokkan, skarplandeð, frammin landę, fliuot, This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_4_5
Conversation about their home and its surroundings in Blibjärr (Sw. Blyberg)., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_6_a
Discussion about old traditions, name customs., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.
Conversation_6_b
Conversation about old and new words., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain., This project pursues a broadscale and in-depth linguistic inquiry into landscape. The geophysical environment is virtually unexplored in linguistics. Yet it is a fundamental spatial domain with enormous potential for influence on the discipline. How do languages select geographic objects to be labelled? Are there universal categories? What’s the relationship between common nouns (landscape terms) and proper nouns (place names)? Which are the ontological principles of landscape categories? How and why do categorial strategies vary across languages and speakers? The project situates landscape within linguistics as a fundamental domain of human representational systems. It also opens up links between linguistics and other disciplines concerned with landscape that usually have little to do with language. It achieves this by pursuing a program geared to (1) exploring systems of landscape categorization in a number of languages, (2) comparing such systems as well as comparing systems in language with those in cognition, (3) developing a model for understanding categorization strategies across languages and speakers, and (4) documenting vanishing landscape systems. Thus, the research team pursues a range of linguistic lines of inquiry into landscape categorization across six diverse language settings (in Australia, Europe, South America and Southeast Asia). Each language setting represents a case study carried out by a project member with expert knowledge and prior field experience of the particular setting. Data collection is carried out using a bundle of elicitation and experimental techniques, detailed in a field guide developed by the project. Collection, analysis, and documentation of spatially recordable linguistic data is carried out with GIS technology. Each language setting offers opportunities of studying closely related language varieties as well as individuals speaking the same language, making comparison possible not only among maximally diverse languages but also at finer levels of linguistic granularity. An exploratory psycholinguistic subproject probes the relationship between language and cognition in the landscape domain.

In collections

Description

More or less free conversations, which often focus on old and new words in Övdalian, life in the summer pastures (Sw. fäbodar), but also the researcher asking about particular words and the speaker's associations connected to these words.