asked. This helps in the assessment of subjects’ understanding of and attitudes toward actual samples of the language from various areas.
Procedure: We recorded a narrative story from a Lohorung speaker and a Yamphu speaker. It was then played for people, in other Lohorung and Yamphu communities, who were not told the story’s place of
origin. As subjects listened to each story, they answered comprehension questions recorded in their own dialect about the story. After listening to each story, subjects answered questions about their
understanding of and opinions toward the speech variety used by the storyteller. The tests were administered first in the community the speaker was from to ensure we had a representative recorded
text from that variety. This is referred to as the home town test HTT. The stories used and responses for the RTT can be found in Appendix B.
Advantages: By using actual samples of selected speech varieties, an initial assessment of intelligibility and attitudes can be made.
Disadvantages: This test can be time consuming to develop. The type of RTT used in this survey only evaluates basic understanding of narrative texts. In addition it does not measure reading and writing
ability in the second dialect.
3.3.3 Informal interviews
Description and Purpose: A prepared interview schedule based on the “Sociolinguistic Questionnaire A,” used by the Linguistic Survey of Nepal guided interaction in order to gather information regarding
specific sociolinguistic issues, while allowing freedom to inquire or discuss issues further if it might provide additional information relevant to the research questions of the survey. An additional interview
schedule dubbed the “Knowledgeable Insider Questionnaire” was used to investigate issues relevant to each village context, which are more factual in nature than individual patterns of language choice or
attitudes.
Procedure: The interview schedule was written in English and Nepali, and interviews were conducted in Nepali. An example of this procedure would be asking “What language do you usually speak with your
children?” as on the planned interview schedule. If the interviewee happened to respond with two or more languages, we followed up with questions such as “Do you speak one of these languages more often
than the other?” This allowed the interviews to focus more on patterns of language use and their impact on language vitality and shift than on other topics, such as generalized trends of multilingualism. The
interview schedule, biographical data of respondents, and responses can be found in Appendix C. The Knowledgeable Insider Questionnaire and responses are in Appendix D.
Advantages: Depending on the length of the interview schedule, the time in administration can be minimal, allowing for relatively large numbers of people to be interviewed. The informal nature of the
interviews helps subjects feel comfortable and share openly, while allowing greater depth and context for their responses.
Disadvantages: Informal interviews are limited in that subjects may only report what they want the researcher to hear, or what they believe the researcher would like to hear.
3.3.4 Dialect Mapping participatory method
Description and Purpose: This method initiates discussion of existing dialects, their geographic location, and perceived levels of comprehension between varieties.
Procedure: Participants were invited to describe where their language is spoken and the different varieties spoken. They then identified how different other varieties of their language are from their own
and how well they understand other varieties. They then identified which variety they use in conversation with people from each area, and identified which variety they believe has the greatest
potential to be a written standard. The complete steps and data collected through Dialect Mapping can be found in Appendix E.
Advantages: Provides a visual representation of which communities participants interact with, how well participants feel they understand other varieties, how their language may or may not be altered in these
circumstances, and their attitudes towards each variety.
Disadvantages: May seem complicated or redundant to participants. Although they are a useful indicator, emic perspectives do not always match linguistic reality.
3.3.5 Domains of Language use participatory method
