DOCUMENT RESUME ED 052 210 24 TE 002 498 AUTHOR Qazilbash, A. Hussain TITLE A Dialect Survey of the Appalachian Region. Final Report. INSTITUTION Morehead State Univ., Ey. Appalachian Adult Basic Education Demonstration Center. SPONS AGENCY National Center for Educational Research and Development (DHEW/CE), Washington, D.C. BUREAU NO BR-O-C-047 PUB DATE May 71 GRANT OEG-3-70-0043(509) NOTE 420p.; Ph.D. Dissertation, Florida State University EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF-$0.65 HC-$16.45 DESCRIPTORS *Dialects, *Linguistics, *Nonstandard Dialects, *Regional Dialects, Surveys, *Vocabulary Skills IDENTIFIERS *Appalachian Region ABSTRACT To determine the linguistic structure of the Appalachian region, 9 interviewees from each of 13 states (Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, Maryland, New York, Kentucky, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia) were chosen by selected criteria. The interviewees were classified as rustic, modern, and cultured speakers. Hour-long participant interviews were conducted, with a total of 117 hours of spoken discourse being taped. The data consisted of 471,656 words. The data analysis provided: (1) an alphabetized list of words and their frequency by respondent; (2) an overall alphabetized list of the data with word frequency for the region; (3) an overall alphabetized word frequency list of misused words and their correct forms; and (4)an overall alphabetized word frequency list of colloquial terms and their explanations. From the tables obtained, a list of corrected functional vocabulary was prepared by state and types of speaker. There was an overall variation of 19.4 percent of Appalachian English from the standard English, which led to the conclusion that there is a distinct pattern of linguistic structure in the region. (Author/DB) !3R -0 I-1 hf r--1 Final Report Oki Project No.0-3047 Grant No.OEG-3-70-0043 .009) Ltd APPALACHIAN REGION A DIALECT SURVEYOF THE By A. HUSAINQAZILBASH Demonstration Center Appalachian AdultBasic Education Morehead StateUniversity Morehead, Kentucky May 1971 reported herein wasperformed pursuant to a The research of Education, OEG-3-70-0043 (509)with the Office Grant No. Education, and Welfare.Con- U.S. Departmentof Health, such projects underGovernment sponse- tractors undertaking professional ship are encouragedto expressfreely their conduct of the project.Points of view or- judgment in the necessarily represent opinions stateddo not, therefore, official Office ofEducation position orpolicy. EDUCATION, ANDWELFARE U.S. DEPARTMENTOF HEALTH, 0 Office of Education and Development National Center forEducational Research (Regional Research,Program) Region IVAtlanta, Georgia A DIALECT SURVEY OF THE APPALACHIAN REGION By A. HUSAIN QAZILBASH A Dissertation submitted to the Department of Adult Education in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION DOCTORAL COMMITTEE: Dr. George F. Aker, Chairman Dr. Wayne L. Schroeder Dr. Andrew Hendrickson Dr. Edwin H. Smith ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his very sincere gratitude to the many people whose support, guidance and encouragement were invaluable during the development and preparation of this disseration. Very special acknowledgments are extended to the following people: To Dr. George F. Aker, Chairman of the Doctoral Committee, for his support and encouragement not only during the development of this research but also the graduate work leading to the degree. To Dr. Wayne L. Schroeder, Dr. Andrew Hendrickson and Dr. Edwin Smith, members of the Doctoral Committee, for their assistance and guidance in seeing this project to completion. To Dr. Roy J. Ingham for his invaluable assistance and guidance during the author's stay at Florida State University. To Mr. George W. Eyster, Executive Director of the Appalachian Adult Basic Education Demonstration Center at Morehead State University in Morehead, Kentucky, and my colleagues at this center for their sincere cooperation and devotion to the objectives of the study. To Dr. John Sherk and Dr. B. K. Singh of the University of Missouri, Kaivsas City, Missouri, and Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, respectively for their consultation and help during the study and analysis of the data. To the interviewers, Mrs. Sharon Willis, Miss Diane Cassity, Miss Karen Cole, and Mr. Rick Collis, who helped in the collection of data. To Mrs. Carolyn Martin whose continuous devotion in the management of the study, transcribing the tapes, and typing the manuscript was of great help. To Mrs. Mary McCoy for typing the final draft, meeting administrative deadlines and friendly assistance during my graduate program. To my parents, Begum and Agha Zafar H. Qazilbash, who taught me to see beyond the continental horizons and sent me abroad to pursue higher education. Sincere and deepest appreciation is reserved for the author's wife, Karla, and our two children, Yasmine and Anwar. We pursued the dream as a family and we are equally responsi- ble for its fulfillment. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES wi LIST OF FIGURES vii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem Significance of the Study ILREVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH 7 III. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 15 Definition of Terms IV. METHODOLOGY 22 Introduction Variables Measured V. ANALYSIS OF THE DATE 30 Introduction Part One Appalachian Dialect: Some Related Variables Relationship Between Dependent and Independent Variables VI. SUMMARY 52 Purpose and Methods Findings and Conclusions Implications for Theory iv Appendices Page A. INTERVIEW SCHEDULE 65 B. INTERVIEW AND RESPONDENT CODES BY STATE AND TYPE OF SPEAKERS 68 C.STORAGE OF INFORMATION ON COMPUTER MAGNETIC TAPES--SPOKEN WORDS 70 D.STORAGE OF INFORMATION ON COMPUTER MAGNETIC TAPES ,, 72 E. CHARACTERISTICS OF PARTICIPANTS QUESTIONNAIRE 75 E. ALPHABETIZED WORD FREQUENCY LIST 80 G. ALPHABETIZED LIST OF MISUSED WORDS WITH TEN OR MORE FREQUENCY 110 H.ALPHABETIZED LIST OF COLLOQUIAL WORDS WITH TEN OR MORE FREQUENCY 114 I. ALPHABETIZED LIST OF MISUSED WORDS AND THEIR CORRECT FORMS 118 J. ALPHABETIZED LIST OF COLLOQUIAL TERMS AND THEIR EXPLANATIONS 121 BIBLIOGRAPHY 127 VITA 136 LIST OF TABLES Table Page L. Average Functional Vocabulary by State and Types of Speakers 31 2.Average Misused Words by State and the Types of Speaker .. 35 3.Average Colloquial Words Used by State and Types of Speaker 38 4.Average Corrected Functional Vocabulary by State and Types of Speaker 41 5.Zero Order Correlation Among the Variables 44 6.Zero Order Correlation Among the Dependent Variables 45 7.Zero Order Correlation Among the Independent Variables 46 8.Zero Order Correlation Among Independent and Dependent Variables 48 9.Hypothesized Relationships and their Results 49 10. The Relationships Between Independent and Dependent Variables With Control Factors Removed 50 vi LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. Agreements and Inversions about Functional Vocabulary by State and Types of Speakers.. 33 2.Misused Words 36 3.Colloquial Words 39 4.Corrected Functional Vocabulary 42 5.Zero Order Correlation Among the Dependent Variable 45 vii Abstract A DIALECT SURVEY OF THE APPALACHIAN REGION By A. Husain Qazilbash Major Professor, Dr. George P. Aker The purpose of this research was to: 1.Determine the linguistic structure of the Appalachian Region in terms of functional vocabulary, misused words, colloquial terms and corrected functional vocabulary. An overall list of misused words, their corrected forms, colloquial terms and their explanations was developed. 2.Determine the relationship between education, urban contact and media contact and functional vocabulary, misused words, colloquial terms and corrected functional vocabulary. 3.Determine the relationship of age, sex, and income to functional vocabulary, misused words, colloquial terms and corrected functional vocabulary. To determine the linguistic structure of the Appalachian region nine Interviewees Irom each of ihirteen siates were chosen by sclecLed criteria.The nine interviewees were classified as rustic, modern and cultured speakers. The term rustic referred to speakers older in age with minimum education, the term modern was used for younger persons with high school education or its equivalent, and the term cultured referred to speakers with a college education with no age restrictions. 2 An hour long participant interviews were conducted, and a total of 117 hours of spoken discourse was taped. Each tape was transcribed and all words from the transcripts were punched on computer cards. The data consisted of 471,656 words. Data were transferred to magnetic tapes yielding the following analysis: (1)An alphabetized list of words and their frequency by respondents, providing the functional vocabulary of each respondent; (2)an overall alphabetized list of the data with word frequency for the region; (3)an overall alphabetized word frequency list of misused words and their correct forms; (4)an overall alphabetized word fre- quency list of colloquial terms and their explanations. From the tables thus obtained a list of corrected functional vocabulary was prepared by state and types of speaker (functional vocabulary minus misused worf.s + colloquial terms). It was hypothesized that rustic speakers have a smaller func- tional vocabulary than modern and cultured speakers and modern speakers have a smaller vocabulary than the cultured speakers. The hypothesis was supported only in six of the thirteen states. The variations