Discussions of folklinguistic accounts of language use are frequently focused on dismissing them because of their limitations. As a result, not a lot is written regarding how such accounts are done and how they “work.” This article examines how folklinguistic evaluations are achieved in interaction, particularly through appeals to semiotic registers (Agha 2007). It describes how in explaining their beliefs regarding linguistic variation, speakers frequently produce voicings with varying transparency. These rely on understandings of the social world and bring large collections of linguistic resources into play. They offer rich insights if analytic attention is given to their details because even when evaluating a single variant, whole ways of speaking, and even being, may be utilized. The paper explores in turn how analysis reveals the inseparability of variants, understandings of context and audience, the relationship between linguistic forms and social types, and the performance of social types via the evaluation of semiotic resources. In each section, discussion is grounded in extracts from interviews on Australian English with speakers of this variety of English. Cumulatively they show the primacy of semiotic registers in ethno‐metapragmatic accounts.

中文翻译：

---

呼吁民族-语用学的变异记述中的符号学语录

由于语言使用的局限性，关于语言使用的民俗语言解释的讨论通常集中在驳斥它们。结果，关于如何完成这些帐户以及它们如何“工作”的文章很多。本文探讨了如何在互动中实现民俗语言评价，尤其是通过对符号学语录的吸引力（Agha 2007）。它描述了讲者如何在解释他们对语言变异的信念时如何经常发声具有不同的透明度。这些依赖于对社会世界的理解，并使大量语言资源发挥作用​​。如果分析关注他们的细节，他们将提供丰富的见解，因为即使在评估单个变体时，也可以使用整个说话方式，甚至是存在方式。本文反过来探讨了如何通过符号符号资源的评估来揭示变体的不可分割性，对上下文和受众的理解，语言形式与社会类型之间的关系以及社会类型的表现。在每个部分中，讨论都基于对澳大利亚英语的采访摘要，这些采访者使用了多种英语。累积地，它们显示了族裔-语用学应用账户中的符号记号的优势。