On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2004 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Signum: Estudos da Linguagem |
Texto Completo: | https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/3539 |
Resumo: | Under the rubric of standard Weinrich (1954, p. 396) includes, among other notions, those of ‘socially acceptable’ or ‘average’ or ‘typical’. For Portuguese linguists the main criterion for a model to represent standard language has always been the speech modality of the cultured or urban people. There is no agreement, however, over whether the speech of Lisbon or that of Coimbra should set the norm. In an article reviewing the position of early Portuguese linguists regarding the interpretation of what is the Portuguese padrão (standard), Boléo (1946) expresses that Gonçalves Viana (1892) and José Pedro Machado (1940) shared the conviction that it is the speech of the cultured parlance of Lisbon that is considered as the standard, as opposed to that of Coimbra, which was the choice of Oliveira Guimarães (1927) as well as Boléo (1946, p. 11-12). |
id |
UEL-3_39e609dfbf7822386daf78a0d8321452 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/3539 |
network_acronym_str |
UEL-3 |
network_name_str |
Signum: Estudos da Linguagem |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese DialectsOn Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese DialectsPortuguese linguistsPortuguese padrão (standard)Boléo. Under the rubric of standard Weinrich (1954, p. 396) includes, among other notions, those of ‘socially acceptable’ or ‘average’ or ‘typical’. For Portuguese linguists the main criterion for a model to represent standard language has always been the speech modality of the cultured or urban people. There is no agreement, however, over whether the speech of Lisbon or that of Coimbra should set the norm. In an article reviewing the position of early Portuguese linguists regarding the interpretation of what is the Portuguese padrão (standard), Boléo (1946) expresses that Gonçalves Viana (1892) and José Pedro Machado (1940) shared the conviction that it is the speech of the cultured parlance of Lisbon that is considered as the standard, as opposed to that of Coimbra, which was the choice of Oliveira Guimarães (1927) as well as Boléo (1946, p. 11-12). Under the rubric of standard Weinrich (1954, p. 396) includes, among other notions, those of ‘socially acceptable’ or ‘average’ or ‘typical’. For Portuguese linguists the main criterion for a model to represent standard language has always been the speech modality of the cultured or urban people. There is no agreement, however, over whether the speech of Lisbon or that of Coimbra should set the norm. In an article reviewing the position of early Portuguese linguists regarding the interpretation of what is the Portuguese padrão (standard), Boléo (1946) expresses that Gonçalves Viana (1892) and José Pedro Machado (1940) shared the conviction that it is the speech of the cultured parlance of Lisbon that is considered as the standard, as opposed to that of Coimbra, which was the choice of Oliveira Guimarães (1927) as well as Boléo (1946, p. 11-12). UEL2004-07-15info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAvaliado pelos paresapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/353910.5433/2237-4876.2002v5n1p77Signum: Estudos da Linguagem; Vol. 5 No. 1 (2002): Volume Atemático; 77-106Signum: Estudos da Linguagem; v. 5 n. 1 (2002): Volume Atemático; 77-1062237-4876reponame:Signum: Estudos da Linguageminstname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELporhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/3539/2861Blayer, Irene Maria Ferreirainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-11-16T17:57:44Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/3539Revistahttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signumPUBhttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/oai||signum@uel.br2237-48761516-3083opendoar:2022-11-16T17:57:44Signum: Estudos da Linguagem - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
title |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
spellingShingle |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects Blayer, Irene Maria Ferreira Portuguese linguists Portuguese padrão (standard) Boléo. |
title_short |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
title_full |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
title_fullStr |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
title_full_unstemmed |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
title_sort |
On Vocalic* Variations in Portuguese Dialects |
author |
Blayer, Irene Maria Ferreira |
author_facet |
Blayer, Irene Maria Ferreira |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Blayer, Irene Maria Ferreira |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Portuguese linguists Portuguese padrão (standard) Boléo. |
topic |
Portuguese linguists Portuguese padrão (standard) Boléo. |
description |
Under the rubric of standard Weinrich (1954, p. 396) includes, among other notions, those of ‘socially acceptable’ or ‘average’ or ‘typical’. For Portuguese linguists the main criterion for a model to represent standard language has always been the speech modality of the cultured or urban people. There is no agreement, however, over whether the speech of Lisbon or that of Coimbra should set the norm. In an article reviewing the position of early Portuguese linguists regarding the interpretation of what is the Portuguese padrão (standard), Boléo (1946) expresses that Gonçalves Viana (1892) and José Pedro Machado (1940) shared the conviction that it is the speech of the cultured parlance of Lisbon that is considered as the standard, as opposed to that of Coimbra, which was the choice of Oliveira Guimarães (1927) as well as Boléo (1946, p. 11-12). |
publishDate |
2004 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2004-07-15 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Avaliado pelos pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/3539 10.5433/2237-4876.2002v5n1p77 |
url |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/3539 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5433/2237-4876.2002v5n1p77 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/signum/article/view/3539/2861 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
UEL |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Signum: Estudos da Linguagem; Vol. 5 No. 1 (2002): Volume Atemático; 77-106 Signum: Estudos da Linguagem; v. 5 n. 1 (2002): Volume Atemático; 77-106 2237-4876 reponame:Signum: Estudos da Linguagem instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) instacron:UEL |
instname_str |
Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
instacron_str |
UEL |
institution |
UEL |
reponame_str |
Signum: Estudos da Linguagem |
collection |
Signum: Estudos da Linguagem |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Signum: Estudos da Linguagem - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||signum@uel.br |
_version_ |
1799305961146417152 |