On the Effect of Reciprocal Dyadic Relations on the Share of Lexical Practices-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

On the Effect of Reciprocal Dyadic Relations on the Share of Lexical Practices

Published:2023-01-01 Issue:1 Volume:43 Page:26-49
ISSN:0226-1766
Container-title:Connections
language:en
Short-container-title:

Author:

Fernandez Guillaume P.¹

Affiliation:

1. University of Geneva , Institute of Sociological Research , Genève , Switzerland .

Abstract

Abstract Variationist studies have shown the implication of tie properties in the emergence and preservation of linguistic norms. This contribution deepens the understanding of this mechanism at the dyadic level. It explores relational subjectivity and relativity among individuals of a community and their implications in the distribution of lexical variants. The aim is to understand how the reciprocity of a relation influences the share of lexical practices. To do so, we analyze the network of discussions of bachelor's degree students of the University of Geneva and their lexical practices. Using the modern methods used in social network analysis to study relational properties and by running multiple regression quadratic assignment procedure (MRQAP), reciprocal interactions are found to lead to a higher lexical share and similarity.

Publisher

Walter de Gruyter GmbH

Subject

Education,Cultural Studies

Link

https://www.sciendo.com/pdf/10.2478/connections-2022-0001

Reference112 articles.

1. Albert, E. M. (1986). Culture patterning of speech behavior in Burundi. In Gumperz J. and Hymes D. (Eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics : The Ethnography of communication (pp. 72–105). Oxford : Basil Blackwell.

2. Androutsopoulos, J. K. (2000). Extending the concept of the (socio)linguistic variable to slang. In K. Tamas (Ed.), Mi a szleng? (pp. 109–140). Debrecen: Kossuth Lajos University Press.

3. Aral, S., Muchnik, L., & Sundararajan, A. (2009). Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks. PNAS, 106 (51), 21545–21549.

4. Aral, S., & Walker D. (2014). Tie strength, embeddedness, and social influence: A Large-scale networked experiment. Management Science, 60(6), 1352–1370. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2014.1936

5. Bauer, L., & Bauer W. (2000). Nova Zelandia est ominis divisa in partes tres. New Zealand English Journal, 14, 7–17.