<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim">
    <record>
        <controlfield tag="001">31215</controlfield>
        <controlfield tag="005">20150429092420.0</controlfield>
        <datafield tag="037" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">TAZ-TFG-2014-2536</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">eng</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Buñuel Martínez, Marta</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="245" ind1="0" ind2="0">
            <subfield code="a">Dialect Diversity in the Middle English Period</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="260" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Zaragoza</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">Universidad de Zaragoza</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">2014</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="506" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">by-nc-sa</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">Creative Commons</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">3.0</subfield>
            <subfield code="u">http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Languages around the world are not homogeneous. Any language is bound to suffer dialect variation within its grammar, lexis, and pronunciation and Great Britain is not an exception. There was a time in the UK when differences were at their peak. That happened during the Middle English period. The main issue of this paper is to comment on the most relevant differences within two great dialectal areas of Great Britain –North and South– by focusing on two texts from that period, specifically, from the 14th century. Therefore, the differences shown are a matter of geography, rather than chronological. Each text –the Northern manuscript The Bee and the Stork and the Southern text Ayenbite of Inwyt– has been analyzed both syntactically and morphologically in order to find out the most remarkable differences between them. This paper concludes with an explanation of the most relevant differences according to dialect and their gradual homogeneity as a consequence of the development of Standard English in the 15th century.</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="521" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Graduado en Estudios Ingleses</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="540" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Derechos regulados por licencia Creative Commons</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="700" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Hornero Corisco, Ana</subfield>
            <subfield code="e">dir.</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="710" ind1="2" ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">Universidad de Zaragoza</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">Filología Inglesa y Alemana</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">Filología Inglesa</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="856" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="f">634714@celes.unizar.es</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="s">687127</subfield>
            <subfield code="u">http://zaguan.unizar.es/record/31215/files/TAZ-TFG-2014-2536.pdf</subfield>
            <subfield code="y">Memoria (eng)</subfield>
            <subfield code="z">Memoria (eng)</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="909" ind1="C" ind2="O">
            <subfield code="o">oai:zaguan.unizar.es:31215</subfield>
            <subfield code="p">driver</subfield>
            <subfield code="p">trabajos-fin-grado</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="950" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a"></subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">deposita:2015-04-21</subfield>
        </datafield>
        <datafield tag="980" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
            <subfield code="a">TAZ</subfield>
            <subfield code="b">TFG</subfield>
            <subfield code="c">FFYL</subfield>
        </datafield>
    </record>

    
</collection>