How clear are the boundaries between varieties? Or What is the criterion in which adopted to distinguish between language and dialect?
The hierarchical model of the family tree implies that the boundaries between varieties are clear at all levels of the tree . Is it possible for tree to reveal and identify even the individual speaker (idiolect ) Mutually intelligible 4. Geographical boundaries.
If we consider the differences based on geography, it should be identified on the basis of geographical areas and that what are called regional dialects .
Isogloss The dialect geographer may then draw a line between the area where one item was found and areas where others were found, showing a boundary for each area called an ISOGLOSS (from Greek iso - 'same' and gloss- 'tongue'). The family tree model allows isoglosses to make subdivisions within a variety,
According to the family tree model, then, isoglosses should never intersect. Why? for example: One isogloss separates the area (to the north) where come is pronounced with the same vowel as stood, from the area where it has the open vowel [A], as in Received Pronunciation , the prestige accent of England. The other isogloss separates the area (to the north-east) where r of farm is not pronounced, from the area where it is.
Important: The only way to reconcile this kind of pattern with the family tree model would be to give priority to one isogloss over the other, but such a choice would be arbitrary and would in any case leave the subordinate isoglosses unconnected, each representing a subdivision of a different variety, whereas in fact each clearly represents a single phenomenon.
The conclusion: I. each item has its own distribution through the population of speakers, II. Reasonable conclusion to draw from the data. But this leads to the further conclusion that isoglosses need not delimit varieties, except in the trivial sense where varieties each consist of just one item; and if we cannot rely on isoglosses to delimit varieties, what can we use?