Automatic dialect classification of the Southern Dutch dialects

Abstract Since the 1980s, computational methods have been introduced to dialectology (known as dialectometry, cf. Goebl 1984 , Heeringa 2004 ). Many of these methods were designed for data from dialect surveys or linguistic atlases, typically elicited items uttered in isolation. Scholars have turned to corpus-based approaches to seek dialect patterns from more naturalistic speech, which can tell us more about the context and magnitude of the variants used ( Kuparinen and Scherrer 2024 ). Transcriptions of spontaneous speech pose challenges for traditional approaches to automatic dialect classification: it is impossible to go through all the transcriptions manually; these are not systematic word lists; and we should not only extract the frequency of some known features, as we might overlook features that are not yet discovered. This paper employs topic modelling to automatically detect dialect groups in the southern Dutch dialects. This method is data-driven and can overcome the issues mentioned above. The result shows that southern Dutch dialects can be divided into 2 to 4 major groups, coinciding with the traditional classification ( Taeldeman 2001 ).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Nota Bene
Published
2025-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1075/nb.00043.sun
Primary Topic
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Automatic dialect classification of the Southern Dutch dialects

Ho Wang Matthew Sung
Nota Bene
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
article

Automatic dialect classification of the Southern Dutch dialects

Ho Wang Matthew Sung
article en

Abstract

Abstract Since the 1980s, computational methods have been introduced to dialectology (known as dialectometry, cf. Goebl 1984 , Heeringa 2004 ). Many of these methods were designed for data from dialect surveys or linguistic atlases, typically elicited items uttered in isolation. Scholars have turned to corpus-based approaches to seek dialect patterns from more naturalistic speech, which can tell us more about the context and magnitude of the variants used ( Kuparinen and Scherrer 2024 ). Transcriptions of spontaneous speech pose challenges for traditional approaches to automatic dialect classification: it is impossible to go through all the transcriptions manually; these are not systematic word lists; and we should not only extract the frequency of some known features, as we might overlook features that are not yet discovered. This paper employs topic modelling to automatically detect dialect groups in the southern Dutch dialects. This method is data-driven and can overcome the issues mentioned above. The result shows that southern Dutch dialects can be divided into 2 to 4 major groups, coinciding with the traditional classification ( Taeldeman 2001 ).

Nota BeneVol. 2(2)
Meertens Institute (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Linguistic Variation and Morphology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Automatic dialect classification of the Southern Dutch dialects — Ho Wang Matthew Sung · Nota Bene (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS