Cover not available
Part of
Our People’s Language: Variation and change in the Lánnang-uè of the Manila Lannangs
Wilkinson Daniel Wong Gonzales
[Contact Language Library 62] 2025
► pp. vii–xi

List of figures

Figure 1.Vowel phonemes of Lánnang‑uè, adapted from Gonzales & Starr (2020)
Figure 2.Acoustic comparison of duration between a minimal pair in Lánnang‑uè: (a) recôrd [ˈɻe33 koɻd55] vs. (b) recôrd [ɻe33ˈkoɻd55]
Figure 3.Acoustic comparison of duration between percênt [pɻ̩ˈsɛnt] and simpèr [ˈsim pɻ̩]
Figure 4.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot: Individual intraspeaker consistency scores (conformance to the stress pattern)
Figure 5.Syllable duration (indicative of actual stress) in syllables expected to be stressed/unstressed for each participant
Figure 6.Marginal means/effects of age, sex, and proficiency on duration and expected stress
Figure 7.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot: Individual intraspeaker consistency scores (lexical tone in Lánnang‑uè words)
Figure 8.Marginal effects of proficiency in Tagalog and English on likelihood to use lexical tone in a Lánnang‑uè word
Figure 9.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot: Individual intraspeaker consistency scores (adherence to the CVT/CV tone pattern)
Figure 10.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot: Individual intraspeaker consistency scores (adherence to the CVR-English/CVR-Tagalog tone pattern)
Figure 11.Pitch slope (imputed) in CV and CVT syllables in Tagalog- and English-origin words for each participant
Figure 12.Pitch slope (imputed) in CVR-English and CVR-Tagalog syllables for each participant
Figure 13.Syllable structure and pitch slope by source language of the word (final syllables of Tagalog- and English-origin words)
Figure 14.Marginal means/effects of (a) age, (b) sex, and (c) proficiency on the CVT/CV tone pattern in Tagalog- and English-origin words
Figure 15.Marginal means/effects of (a) age, (b) sex, and (c) proficiency — the CVR-Tagalog/CVR-English tone pattern
Figure 16.Final pitch slope, structure, age, and source language of the word (Tagalog- and English-origin words)
Figure 17.Distribution of source language variants by individual participants (conjunctions)
Figure 18.Marginal effect plots for conjunction model, presenting only factors with pd > 0.89
Figure 19.Marginal effect plot for preposition model: Interaction between age and gender (conjunctions)
Figure 20.Distribution of source language variants by individual participants (prepositions)
Figure 21.Marginal effect plots for preposition model, presenting only factors with pd > 0.89
Figure 22.Marginal effect plot for preposition model: Interaction between age and gender (prepositions)
Figure 23.Set-up of criminal investigation task
Figure 24.Sample note-taking grid (filled)
Figure 25.Screenshots of acceptability experiment
Figure 26.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot of proportions (adherence to wh-phrase distributional pattern, production)
Figure 27.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot of proportions (adherence to wh-phrase position distributional pattern, stratified by wh-type
Figure 28.Marginal means/effects of wh-phrase type, age, sex, and proficiency on likelihood to put wh-phrase at sentence-initial position (production)
Figure 29.Marginal means/effects of age, sex, and proficiency on likelihood to put why-phrases at sentence-initial position
Figure 30.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plot of proportions (adherence to wh-phrase position distribution, acceptability)
Figure 31.Histogram (frequency), density, and box plots of proportions (adherence to wh-phrase distributional pattern, acceptability), stratified by position and wh-phrase type
Figure 32.Marginal effects of age, sex, and proficiency on likelihood to adhere to wh-question pattern based on acceptability judgments
Figure 33.Marginal effects of age, sex, and proficiency in insitu languages on ratings of sentence-initial constructions featuring why-phrases
Figure 34.Marginal effects of age, sex, and proficiency in insitu languages on ratings of sentence-medial or final constructions featuring why-phrases
Figure 35.Marginal effects of age, sex, and proficiency in wh-fronting languages on ratings of sentence-initial constructions featuring how/when/where/who/what-phrases
Figure 36.Marginal effects of age, sex, and proficiency in wh-fronting languages on ratings of sentence-medial and final constructions featuring how/when/where/object who/object what-phrases
Figure 37.Distribution of Hokkien-, Tagalog- and English-sourced words by speaker using “Lánnang‑uè”
Figure 38.Screenshot of a comment indicating that the mixed language style of Lánnang‑uè is “smooth”
Figure 39.Screenshot of a comment indicating that the mixed language style of Lánnang‑uè is “authentic”
Figure 40.Screenshot of a comment indicating that the mixed language style of Lánnang‑uè is “nostalgic”
Figure 41.Screenshot of a comment showing a younger speaker regarding the mixed style of Lánnang‑uè as Chinese conyo.
Figure 42.Screenshot of a comment showing a younger speaker responding to the mixed style of Lánnang‑uè
Figure 43.Two viral videos of POGOs in the Philippines, circulated publicly over WeChat (via Facebook Lannang heritage group, April 26, 2019)
Figure 44.The three styles of Lánnang‑uè, their social meanings, and how they relate to some salient personae and broader social types
Figure 45.Model of sociolinguistic complexity in a multilingual setting
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.