Understanding the relationship between speaker's attitudes and linguistic behaviour across speech communities

仅在欧洲就有60多种区域/少数民族语言，有5000多万人使用。大多数语言都受到某种程度的危害，在不同但可比较的语言社区中经常出现语言维护问题。这些问题的核心是需要监测和理解语言态度，这是众所周知的语言活力的潜在预测。然而，语言态度预测活力的可靠性取决于所采用的测量类型。明确测量的态度（例如自我报告）可能是不可靠的，并且与通过参与者不知道研究目的的隐式方法得出的态度相比，可能只具有附加作用。也有证据表明，传统定义的内隐方法可能不会挖掘内隐态度作为可靠的，因为以前supposed.This项目采用跨学科，跨方法的测量，以获得更深入的了解语言的态度在三个不同的社区，不同程度的语言识别，即伦巴第（意大利），艾弗尔（比利时）和威尔士（英国）。由于语言保持的成功取决于对说话者态度和说话者行为之间联系的理解，我们研究了不同态度测量在预测说话者语言选择方面的可靠性。采用一系列的方法，从声明（自我报告），完全无意识（神经生理数据），通过行为测量与低参与者的意识（反应时间任务），我们调查了迄今为止未研究的态度领域的频谱。（一）采用陈述性方法（自我报告问卷），充分明确态度。(ii)半内隐态度，使用一种既定的方法，参与者只部分意识到语言的目的。由于这种方法的隐含性受到质疑，这些数据可作为与下文（iii）和（iv）中的创新方法进行比较的参考点。(iii)使用现代行为测量（反应时间任务）的内隐态度，参与者意识水平较低。(iv)完全内隐的态度，通过无意识的神经生理反应测量。(v)为了确定每种方法（i）-（iv）在预测语言行为方面的可靠性，参与者还将参加一项行为选择任务，要求他们在使用地区/少数民族语言和使用多数民族语言之间做出选择。虽然以前的一些研究使用不止一种方法测量语言态度-通常是上述（i）和（ii）的一些变化-但（㈠-㈣在这一领域是前所未有的，对行为选择结果的分析也是如此。本项目也是第一个将（iv）中的方法应用于语言态度调查的项目，为了迎合不同的社会语言学背景，我们收集了三个语言认可程度不同的社区的数据：（1）伦巴第，伦巴第语作为一种区域文化表达方式得到的认可最少，但没有国家承认或官方使用;（2）比利时的艾菲尔，在那里，法兰克尼亚语通过德语的行政和教育使用得到了一些间接的承认。（相关语言），但没有直接承认或机构使用;威尔士，威尔士语在公共生活中与英语享有同等地位（1993年《威尔士语言法》），并受益于一系列将其纳入生活各个方面的政策。纳入行为选择措施和三个不同的语言社区的参与，使我们能够更深入地了解社会政治承认和语言态度之间的反馈回路，并提供新的见解，不同类型的语言态度可能发挥的作用，在预测实际的语言行为。

There are in excess of 60 regional/minority languages in Europe alone, spoken by over 50 million people. Most suffer from some degree of endangerment, and recurring issues of language maintenance arise in different yet comparable language communities. Central to these issues is the need to monitor and understand linguistic attitudes, which are known to be a potential predictor of linguistic vitality. However, the reliability with which linguistic attitudes can predict vitality depends on the type of measurement employed. Attitudes measured explicitly (e.g. self-reports) can be unreliable, and may only have an additive role compared to attitudes elicited via implicit methods where participants are unaware of the research aims. Evidence is also emerging that implicit methods as traditionally defined may not tap implicit attitudes as reliably as previously assumed.This project applies interdisciplinary, cross-methodological measurements to gain a deeper understanding of linguistic attitudes across three different communities with varying degrees of language recognition, namely Lombardy (Italy), Eifel (Belgium) and Wales (UK). As the success of language maintenance hinges on understanding the link between speakers' attitudes and speakers' behaviour, we investigate the reliability of different attitudinal measurements in predicting speakers' language choices. Employing a range of methodologies varying from declarative (self-reports) to fully unconscious (neurophysiological data), via behavioural measurements with low participant awareness (reaction time tasks), we investigate a hitherto unstudied spectrum of attitudinal domains. To achieve this, the following data will be collected:(i) Fully explicit attitudes, using a declarative method (self-report questionnaire).(ii) Semi-implicit attitudes, using an established method where participants are only partly aware of the linguistic aims. As the implicitness of this method has been called into question, these data serve as a reference point of comparison with the innovative methods in (iii) and (iv) below.(iii) Implicit attitudes using modern behavioural measurements (reaction time tasks) with low levels of participant awareness.(iv) Fully implicit attitudes, measured via unconscious neurophysiological responses.(v) To establish the reliability of each method (i)-(iv) in predicting linguistic behaviour, participants will also take part in a behavioural choice task which requires them to choose between using their regional/minority language and their majority language.While some previous studies measured linguistic attitudes using more than one method - typically some variation of (i) and (ii) above - the full range of measurements described in (i)-(iv) is unprecedented in this field, as is the analysis of results in relation to behavioural choice. This project is also the first to apply the technique in (iv) to the investigation of linguistic attitudes.To cater for different sociolinguistic contexts, we collect data from three communities with different degrees of language recognition: (1) Lombardy, where Lombard has minimal recognition as a regional cultural expression, but no state recognition or official use; (2) Belgian Eifel, where Franconian has some indirect recognition via the administrative and educational use of German (a related language) but no direct recognition or institutional use; and (3) Wales, where Welsh has equal status to English in public life (Welsh Language Act 1993) and benefits from a host of policies for its inclusion in all aspects of life.The cross-methodological design, the inclusion of behavioural choice measures and the involvement of three different speech communities allow us to achieve a deeper understanding of the feedback loop between socio-political recognition and linguistic attitudes, and provide novel insights on the role that different types of linguistic attitudes may play in predicting actual linguistic behaviour.