Proposed by Rudolf Muhr with contributions from Leo Kretzenbacher.
- Name of the language the documented variety belongs to
- Other varieties and location(s) of the same language
- The name(s) of the variety: Official / Other name(s)
- Country of origin of the variety
- Number of speakers of the variety (estimated or official)
- Use of the variety: written and spoken or only spoken
- Writing system/alphabet of the variety: Specific or shared with other varieties?
- Which type of alphabet is used (Latin/Arabic/Cyrillic etc.)?
- Is the variety intelligible with other varieties of the same language?
- Linguistic fragmentation: Is there a second level of pluricentricity within the nd-variety, eg. pan-regional varieties forming larger areas within the country?
Standardisation / Codification
- Corpora: Are there electronic text corpora of the ndv-variety?
- The linguistic/pragmatic features of the variety are well studied / little studied / not studied
- Pronunciation: Are there scientific studies / pronunciation dictionary(ies) about the specific phonetic / phonological features of the nd-variety
- Lexicon: Are there scientific studies / dictionary(ies) of the nd-variety? (Spelling-dictionaries, learners dictionaries., universal dictionaries., thesaurus, etc.)
- Grammar: Are there scientific studies on morphology and syntax of the nd-variety? / Are there complete grammars of the nd-variety?
- Pragmatics: Are there scientific studies on the pragmatics of the nd-variety?
- Awareness: Is there linguistic awareness in the speaker-community of the features of the nd-variety?
- Linguistic Identity: Are the linguistic features part of the individual, social and national identity?
- Language loyalty: Are speakers of the nd-variety loyal to their variety by avoiding the features of the dominating variety(ies)? Are the elites of the community loyal to the variety or showing a tendency to prefer the features of the dominating variety(ies)?
- Language development / shift: How strong is the linguistic contact between the non-dominating and dominating variety? Is there a shift towards the dominating variety or away from it?
- Is there an explicit/implicit language policy concerning the codification, status- and corpus-planning of the nd-variety?
- Are there specific measures and institutions for the codification of the nd-variety?
- Is there a co-operation between the norm-setting (codifying) institutions of the d-variety(ies) and the nd-variety?
- Does the nd-variety have any impact on the norm(s) of the pluricentric language?
- How is the variety dealt with in education? Is there an emphasis on the linguistic features of the nd-variety in primary and secondary education?
- How are publishing houses dealing with the linguistic features of the nd-variety in literary works? Are they corrected?