Dialectologists working in the mid twentieth century established a tripartite division of US regional dialects into North, Midland and South. This work documented the retention of traditional usages and focused on lexical variation. Despite the grounding of these dialect divisions in centuries-old settlement and migration patterns, they remain relevant to regional variation in American English today. This is especially true for the boundary separating the Midland from the North. This chapter examines the history of this remarkably stable boundary in American dialectology. The discussion reviews the evidence produced by early linguistic atlas researchers to establish the dialect boundary along the Atlantic Coast and to trace its extension westward. The current status of the Midland–North divide is explored in the light of sociolinguistic research suggesting that dialect differences on either side have been reinforced over the twentieth century.

With legendary regionalisms like ‘r-dropping’, fronted palm vowels, ‘broad-a BATH vowels, and other features, New England has played a key role in the historical development of English in North America. Historically, the six small states of New England (Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont) have had an outsized influence on American English. Their modern sociolinguistic and geographic boundaries still reflect colonial-era settlement patterns from centuries past. Many prior studies on New England English have focused on phonological patterns and changes, but scholars have also examined regional grammatical patterns, lexical variation and change, and also the continuing influence of local Native American words on English. In fact, modern linguists have access to ninety years of detailed fieldwork reports on regional New England dialect features, dating as far back as the 1930s and continuing to the present era. Using this wealth of intergenerational data, the present chapter takes a historical perspective that traces the roots and development of New England English into the present time.

This chapter presents an overview of dialectology that sheds light on the diachronic development of American English varieties. Key projects in US dialect study are considered in light of their historic roots, perspectives and goals; data collection methods; target populations; sampling methods; and linguistic features of focus. Also examined are various types of dialect maps, as well as the use of historic sources that have proven to be useful in tracing the history of dialect forms. The contribution of social dialectological studies is discussed as well, since in-depth surveys across social space have been shown to add to the understanding of how dialect forms develop and diffuse across time and geographic space. The chapter concludes with a discussion of developments in twenty-first-century American dialectology. Throughout, the chapter illustrates how different methods and data sources can be fruitfully brought together to solve the difficult problem of retracing historic pathways for inherently ephemeral spoken language forms.

This chapter explores the importance of England’s traditional dialects for understanding the history of the English language more generally. These dialects are now largely moribund as a result of dialect levelling, standardisation and dialect death but were recorded in considerable detail by linguists in the late nineteenth and early to mid twentieth centuries, and were represented in literary dialect and, especially, dialect literature in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. The chapter discusses the nature of these dialects, the data we have for them, and gives examples of the kinds of things we can learn about the history of English from their study. The history of English has always been one of dialect variation, and the history of the language cannot be properly understood without an analysis of England’s traditional dialects.

This chapter addresses the study of the geographical aspects of English linguistic variation in England, from the beginnings to the sixteenth century. The major challenge in the study of early periods of English is the scarcity of sources, which are often not easy to localise. Only in the fifteenth century does the production of administrative materials in English, in a highly variable writing system, allow for a systematic study of geographical variation covering the entire country; for earlier periods materials are much scantier, and many studies have therefore made use of reconstructive methods. This chapter discusses and problematises the different approaches used by earlier scholars; finally, using the newly compiled Corpus of Middle English Local Documents (MELD), it addresses the possibilities of studying early geographical variation directly, with focus on individual items, rather than through the reconstruction of dialect areas or continua.

The study of the history of English has its roots in the work of English scholars who first concerned themselves with the nature of their language about four hundred years ago. Prior to the eighteenth century this work was pre-linguistic, positing a divine origin for language and comparing English (unfavourably) to Classical Greek and Latin. With the advent of modern linguistics in Indo-European research, the history of English became an object of academic interest and the first university positions for its study were established, mainly in Germany and Scandinavia. Simultaneously there arose a tradition of studying English dialects, first as an antiquarian occupation in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, then later as an attempt to capture local history in the vocabulary of specific regions in the twentieth.  This then led to the production of dialect dictionaries and surveys.

This chapter provides an overview of manuscript production and reception in the OE and ME periods. It focuses on how manuscripts were produced, the cognitive copying practices of its scribes, the subsequent use of manuscript texts by their readers, and the implications these issues have for the texts and data that survive. It considers the methodological issues arising from working on manuscripts in both their physical and edited forms. The chapter argues for the importance of considering manuscript evidence – including material aspects of the text – when using such texts as data for linguistic enquiry, and the value of this overlooked material for increasing our understanding of diachronic change. Finally, the chapter highlights and demonstrates some fruitful approaches to medieval textual material from the disciplines of historical sociolinguistics, dialectology, pragmatics and philology.

This chapter discusses the subdiscipline of micro-comparative syntax in its relation to dialectology and sociolinguistics. While micro-comparative syntax seeks to contribute to a theoretical cognitive model of the human language capacity, dialectology and sociolinguistics study the relation between linguistic properties and external factors such as geography, age, gender, and social class. Differences and similarities between the three subdisciplines are discussed, as well as the ways they can be combined. The chapter has a strong focus on methodology. The appendix to this chapter provides an overview of recent large-scale dialect syntax projects with links to the project websites and databases.

This chapter presents an up-to-date overview of what we know about contemporary grammatical variation in England, drawing on a range of sources such as traditional and variationist dialectological investigations, as well as those using new technologies such as smartphone apps and Twitter feeds. It begins with an assessment of how common the use of non-standard morphosyntax is vis à vis Standard English, before presenting a well-cited list of the most widespread features that are claimed to be found right across the country. The chapter then describes contemporary non-standard grammatical variation in England, examining, in turn: verbs, negation, adverbs, prepositions, plural marking, pronouns, comparison forms, articles and conjunctions. Beyond an account of contemporary morphosyntactic variability, this survey also helps us to locate those linguistic features and those geographical areas about which we hold very little up-to-date information, and, in the light of reports of widespread traditional dialect levelling, points to those non-standard features whose vitality appears to be precarious.

This chapter presents the processes that have resulted in dialectal fragmentation of Slavic languages. It starts with a discussion of early differences in Proto-Slavic, most notably those in reflexes of palatalizations. It then goes on to discuss the variation before the split of the common Slavic community into three branches. This is followed by the presentation of early East Slavic tribal dialects. Next, early lexical differences across and within Slavic languages are considered. The discussion continues by addressing inter-Slavic areal features and prosodic continua. Finally, external factors of fragmentation are discussed (economic, political), alongisde contacts with non-Slavic languages and sociolinguistic factors.

This chapter introduces the aims and structure of the book, familiarizes the reader with key concepts (variants and variables, probabilistic grammars, comparative sociolinguistics, regional variation, indigenization, etc.) and the various subfields of linguistics that are relevant, and sketches the design of the study.

The chapter ’Linguistic Scratching Posts’ looks at how to analyse the collected data to describe a linguistic variety. Taking a dialectological approach, it shows lexical, morphological, and orthographical variation in a list of cat-related keywords. It also uses the categories of the feline purrspective and the human perspective, which illustrate the semantic variation in cat-related digital spaces. All the categories are listed with examples from the data. To show the vastness of the number of users and posts we are dealing with, the chapter provides some statistics for the four social media platforms from which the data was collected: Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube.

The chapter ’The Feline Territory of Language’ shows us how we can approach online language variation with dialectology and outlines the steps to take for a dialectological description of a regional language variety, ranging from dialect data collection to dictionary-making. Using cat-related headwords and survey questions as examples, we look at how the data is collected and presented in the Survey of English Dialects and the Survey of Anglo-Welsh Dialects. The chapter then moves on to dialect lexicography, with cats illustrating the approaches of the EDD, the OED, and the Urban Dictionary, leading us into online dialectology and its use of computers to collect, analyse, and display the data. The last section of the chapter covers phonetics, including its acoustic and articulatory branches. Instead of the usually studied human sounds, however, it takes cat vocalisations to illustrate what to do in phonetics.