THE THIRD VARIATIONIST WAVE: CONTINUITY OR DISCONTINUITY OF PHASES?

• Autor(a) principal: Lacerda, Marcela Langa
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Görski, Edair Maria, Paza, Carla Regina Martins
• Tipo de documento: preprint
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: SciELO Preprints
• Texto Completo: https://preprints.scielo.org/index.php/scielo/preprint/view/4773
• topic: Fases variacionistas; Epistemologia; Continuidade; Descontinuidade; Variatinist phases; Epistemology; Continuity; Discontinuity

The systematization of the studies of variationist sociolinguistics in three waves (ECKERT, 2012), or phases, organizes in a way the work that has been carried out in the area since the 1960s. Refining this systematization, this article aims to discuss the epistemological (and therefore theoretical-methodological) (in)adequacy of the approximation between the waves based on favorable and unfavorable arguments to the idea of continuity/ complementarity between the phases. This investigation has an interpretative nature, constitutes a bibliographic research and examines Eckert (2000; 2008; 2012; 2016a; 2016b; 2018), Labov (2001, 2010), Eckert and Rickford (2001), Coupland (2001; 2007, 2014); Camacho (2013; 2015) Bell (2001; 2014; 2016), Eckert and Labov (2017), Hernández-Campoy (2019; 2020), among other authors. The reflections point to the possibility of two different interpretations about the relatioship established between the different variationist phases: on the one hand, one interpretation is that there is an epistemological continuum between the three phases, so that its assumptions would be integrated in the third wave, leading to a robust theory of variation; on the other hand, another interpretation is that there is no epistemological continuum between the three phases, since the first phase would harmonize with procedures of a structural approach and the third phase would harmonize with procedures of an antropological-discursive approach, leading to a robust theory of variation by the aspects that are constitutive to its (and not by an integration of assumptions of the three phases). In view of the discussion carried out, we highlight that is relevant for the area to consider this controversial metatheoretical point.