Editorial published In: Asia-Pacific Language Variation
Vol. 2:2 (2016) ► pp.121–123
Editorial
This article is available free of charge.
Published online: 6 April 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.2.2.01sat
https://doi.org/10.1075/aplv.2.2.01sat
References (8)
Cheshire, Jenny, Kerswill, Paul, Fox, Sue, & Torgersen, Eivind (2011). Contact, the feature pool and the speech community: The emergence of multicultural London English. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(2), 151–196.
Labov, William (2012). What is to be learned: The community as the focus of social cognition. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 10(2), 265–293.
(2014). The sociophonetic orientation of the language learner. In Chiara Celata & Silvia Calamai (Eds.), Advances in sociophonetics, volume 151 (pp. 17–29). Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Meyerhoff, Miriam, & Schleef, Erik (2012). Variation, contact and social indexicality in the acquisition of (ing) by teenage migrants. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16(3), 398–416.
Michael, Caterine Ann (2015). Dynamics of bilingualism: A study of Delhi Malayalees. Unpublished M.Phil. dissertation, University of Delhi.
Nagy, Naomy (2016). Heritage languages as new dialects. The future of dialects. In Marie- Hèléne Côté, Remco Knooihuizen, & John Nerbonne (Eds.), Selected papers from Methods in Dialectology XV (pp. 15–34). Berlin: Language Science. .
Natvig, David (2016). Heritage Norwegian vowel phonology and English dialect formation. Heritage Language Journal, 13(2), 245–274.
Stanford, James N. (2008). Child dialect acquisition: New perspectives on parent/peer influence. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 12(5), 567–596.