Methodological principles of Mišótika Cappadocian data collection

Abstract

This paper discusses the methodological principles and tools that will be used in our study of the vowel system of Misotika Cappadocian. This study will be based on the collection of recordings of native speech from Cappadocian refugee communities in prefectures of Kilkis, Larisa, Kavala, Chalkidiki and Alexandroupoli, where there are still native speakers of different age groups. In this paper, we focus on the comparison of the methodological principles. In particular, we consider the importance of applying ethnographic with experimental methods in order to collect data of conversational and elicited speech. The point is that the combination of the two types of speech must accomplish ‘ecological validity’ (Post & Nolan, 2012), that is, speech recordings should be a sample of natural speech communication in register with dialectal authenticity. According to Kainada & Baltazani (2013), linguists doing dialectal fieldwork should use a combination of conversational speech and tightly controlled speech tasks. They claim that both can elicit representative dialectal speech, provided we avoid informants’ accommodation to the dominant standard variety. For this reason, the recording of native speech will take place in two phases. Each phase is aimed to produce different results. The first phase will focus on ethnographic fieldwork with recordings of casual conversations. The target is to conduct spontaneous dialectal speech, since conversational speech provides the most naturally uttered and representative dialectal data. The second phase of data collection will be conducted following experimental methods. The tasks will be constructed so as to guide the informants to be accommodated to the variety under investigation (Kainada & Baltazani, 2013). We will apply naming and perceptual experiments as well. On the one hand, we would like to examine how the informants produce a list of words with the target vowels in differential metrical contexts. On the other hand, we want to identify how the native speakers of Misotika perceive the dialectal differences that the current vowel system has undergone, as a result of linguistic change and language contact either with Standard Modern Greek or with other dialectal varieties. Moreover, the appropriate stimuli of the tasks will be based on our previous findings about the vowel system of Misotika. To conclude, this paper compares the combination of ethnographic and experimental principles in the same study. It is essential that targeted experiments are implemented to approach specific dialectal phenomena, but at the same time the collection of casual conversations constitutes the first step for carrying out a larger and more in-depth study of the Misotika vowel system. References Kainada, E. & M., Baltazani. 2013. Evaluating methods for eliciting dialectal speech. In: M. Janse, B. D. Joseph, A. Ralli and M. Bagriacik (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Modern Greek dialects and Linguistic Theory, 101-123. Post, B. & F., Nolan. 2012. Data analysis for prosodic analysis of continuous speech and dialectal variation. In: A.C. Cohn, C. Fougeron, & M. Huffman (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Laboratory Phonology. Oxford: OUP.