Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Figure 5 – uploaded by Pierpaolo Di Carlo

See full PDFdownloadDownload figure
Manuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Nie (Palgrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact pierpaol@buffalo.edu before quoting. Maps in figure 5 are spatial representations of “language-based networks”, i.e. network: where nodes are individuals who are able to communicate using a given language and edges are weighted according to the individual’s reported degree of proficiency (the thicker the line the higher the proficiency). Language-based networks are point-symbol maps displaying survey data and one of their goals is to show just how diffuse knowledge of a given language is among people residing in a given area. To the best of my knowledge, maps of this kind have not been employe in previous linguistic cartographic work. Since Lower Fungom languages are spatially focused (i.e exclusively associated with a village-chiefdom, see above), each language network is centered or the relevant village-chiefdom, and all the speakers of that language are connected to it Individuals themselves are spatially represented in their village of residence. By representing al survey respondents on the map and distinguishing those who are part of the language-specifi. network (colored in orange) from those who are not (colored in gray), the representation make: use of two semiotic strategies that aim to provide information regarding diffusion of linguisti

Figure 5 Manuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Nie (Palgrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact [email protected] before quoting. Maps in figure 5 are spatial representations of “language-based networks”, i.e. network: where nodes are individuals who are able to communicate using a given language and edges are weighted according to the individual’s reported degree of proficiency (the thicker the line the higher the proficiency). Language-based networks are point-symbol maps displaying survey data and one of their goals is to show just how diffuse knowledge of a given language is among people residing in a given area. To the best of my knowledge, maps of this kind have not been employe in previous linguistic cartographic work. Since Lower Fungom languages are spatially focused (i.e exclusively associated with a village-chiefdom, see above), each language network is centered or the relevant village-chiefdom, and all the speakers of that language are connected to it Individuals themselves are spatially represented in their village of residence. By representing al survey respondents on the map and distinguishing those who are part of the language-specifi. network (colored in orange) from those who are not (colored in gray), the representation make: use of two semiotic strategies that aim to provide information regarding diffusion of linguisti

Related Figures (5)

Figure 1: a) distribution of speakers of Arabic, Urdu, and Bengali in the Detroit Metropolitan Area; b) Number of house owner occupants and Greenberg’s linguistic diversity index in the Detroit Metropolitan Area. Data derived from the 2005 US Census, figures from Veselinova and Booza (2009) (images used with permission of the authors). Manuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Niec (Palgrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact pierpaol@buffalo.edu before quoting.
Figure 1: a) distribution of speakers of Arabic, Urdu, and Bengali in the Detroit Metropolitan Area; b) Number of house owner occupants and Greenberg’s linguistic diversity index in the Detroit Metropolitan Area. Data derived from the 2005 US Census, figures from Veselinova and Booza (2009) (images used with permission of the authors). Manuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Niec (Palgrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact [email protected] before quoting.
anuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Niedt algrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact pierpaol@buffalo.edu before quoting.
anuscript under review for publication in New Directions in Linguistic Geography, edited by Greg Niedt algrave, expected publication summer 2022). Contact [email protected] before quoting.
Figure 3: Distribution of speakers of Welsh who use the language in “public” and “institutional” situations, border areas across England and Wales west of Oswestry (the main urban center on map). From Ambrose 1979, fig VI.5, detail). (Permission requested from the author.
Figure 3: Distribution of speakers of Welsh who use the language in “public” and “institutional” situations, border areas across England and Wales west of Oswestry (the main urban center on map). From Ambrose 1979, fig VI.5, detail). (Permission requested from the author.
5.1 Language location from a small-scale multilingualism perspective 5. Views from / of small-scale multilingualism
5.1 Language location from a small-scale multilingualism perspective 5. Views from / of small-scale multilingualism
Figure 6: Spatial distributions of the multilingual repertoires of individuals in the family of ego=ID075 (KPAAM-CAM database).
Figure 6: Spatial distributions of the multilingual repertoires of individuals in the family of ego=ID075 (KPAAM-CAM database).
Related topics:
Linguistic GeographyLinguistic CartographyAfrican Languages and linguistics
580 California St., Suite 400
San Francisco, CA, 94104
© 2025 Academia. All rights reserved