Non-standard evidence in syntactic typology – Methodological remarks on the use of dialect data vs spoken language data

If it is right that (written) standard varieties do not always represent the best empirical basis for typology, which non-standard data should we turn to in order to enhance our chances to capture type-representative regularities (consistency) in a more effective way? The present paper addresses this question by discussing dialect data and data from spoken language as two alternative answers. On the basis of examples from German it is suggested that general features of spoken (dialect and non-dialect) syntax need to be distinguished from geographically restricted (dialectal) and geographically non-restricted features of non-standard syntax. While the first offer the best alternative to written standard language in order to capture typological traits of German as a whole, dialects can provide insights into typological syntactic generalisations when taken as linguistic systems in their own right.