Language & Communication. — 2009. — №2 — p.152-165In this paper, it is argued that name variation and change cannot be studied in a satisfactory way within a variationist sociolinguistic framework, as the latter cannot ultimately cope with the psychological complexity involved in human communication.
The reason why variationism does not describe a social ‘reality’ has to do with its insistence that lexical variantshave to be assignable to ‘fixed codes’ (‘dialects’, ‘sociolects’, ‘style lects’) and that two speakers using different codes will result in misunderstandings and communication breakdowns. The present contribution offers an alternative approach to synchronic name variation inspired by an integrational semiology, thus treating linguistic signs (in this case, toponyms) as context-sensitive and in need of instantaneous referencing. By not considering proper names as part of any fixed codes the integrational fieldworker is able to observe language use unbiased, prepared to accept that in principle any name may be used between any two speakers in any situation. The objects of study for this paper are the names of the three Medieval castles of Bellinzona (Italian-speaking Switzerland), which the present author already investigated in an orthodox sociolinguistic
perspective in the 1990s.
