relic areas

[Joseph Salmons]

Hi Nathan,
You're thinking probably of the Neolinguists. A couple of key works are these:

--Bàrtoli, Matteo. 1925. Introduzione alla Neolinguistica. Genève: Olschki.
--Bonfante, Giuliano. 1947. The Neolinguistic position. Language 23.344–375.

I would look at David Britain's piece in the Handbook of Language Variation and Change too for work on 'geolinguistics' and the new Handbook of Language and Space, ed. by Auer & Schmidt.

Best,
Joe



On Mar 15, 2013, at 8:30 AM, Nathan Hill <nathanwhill at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> I have just been reading something that cites Nichols (1992, 1997) for
> discussion of “spread zones” and “residual zones”. The handbooks
> (Hock, Campbell, etc.) all use the term 'relic zone' and I have a
> vague memory that the observations that mountainous areas have more
> linguistic diversity and more archaisms goes back to an Italian in the
> early 20th century, but my efforts to trace the history of 'relic'
> zones is not going well. It appears that Nichols herself did not
> compare her "residual zones" to "relic zones".
> 
> I would be grateful for any bibliographic tips.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> --
> Dr Nathan W. Hill
> British Academy Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Linguistics
> Senior Lector in Tibetan, Department of China & Inner Asia (on leave)
> SOAS, University of London
> Thornhaugh Street, Russell Square, London WC1H 0XG, UK
> Tel: +44 (0)20 7898 4220
> --
> Profile -- http://www.soas.ac.uk/staff/staff46254.php
> Tibetan Studies at SOAS -- http://www.soas.ac.uk/cia/tibetanstudies/
> --
> _______________________________________________
> Histling-l mailing list
> Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu
> https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l

_______________________________________________
Histling-l mailing list
Histling-l at mailman.rice.edu
https://mailman.rice.edu/mailman/listinfo/histling-l