Refine
Document Type
- Part of a Book (2)
- Article (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Keywords
- Gebrauchsstandard (3) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (1)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Peer-Review (1)
Publisher
- Benjamins (1)
- de Gruyter (1)
Zur Aussprache nicht haupttoniger Vorsilben mit <e> in Lehnwörtern im deutschen Gebrauchsstandard
(2018)
Vortoniges <e> in Lehnwörtern in offenen Silben (demonstrieren, Elefant) ist in den traditionellen deutschen Aussprachewörterbüchern durchgängig mit gespanntem/geschlossenem [e] kodifiziert. Die Auswertung von insgesamt 17 entsprechenden Belegwörtern aus dem Korpus „Deutsch heute“ zeigt für den deutschen Gebrauchsstandard jedoch eine ausgeprägte Variation zwischen den Lauttypen [e], [ɛ] und [ə], die je nach Lexem in ganz unterschiedlichen Anteilen vorkommen. Als Erklärungsansätze für das differierende Variationsverhalten lassen sich Faktoren wie Wortakzentmuster, Folgekonsonanz, Formalitätsgrad und semantisch-morphologische Durchsichtigkeit der Wortbildung anführen. Außerdem zeigt die Variation auch eine ausgeprägte diatopische Dimension: Während im Norden Deutschlands, aber auch im mittelbairisch geprägten Sprachraum und in der Ostschweiz die [e]-Aussprache dominiert, überwiegen in der südlichen Mitte und im Südwesten Deutschlands, im südbairisch geprägten Sprachraum und vor allem in der Westschweiz Belege mit [ɛ]-Aussprache. Die Ergebnisse von „Deutsch heute“ zeigen sich in ähnlicher Weise auch in zusätzlich ausgewerteten Sprachdaten (Nachrichtensendungen, FOLK-Korpus).
By evaluating two corpora containing linguistic data on spoken standard language usage (with a total of 770 speakers), the current range of variation of lexical stress in loanwords will be analyzed. In doing so, the focus will be on the age and background of the speakers to be able to document processes of linguistic change and regionalisms. Regarding the phenomenon studied here, it becomes apparent that more detailed and multicausal separate analyses are required to interpret the results conclusively in spite of an overall trend that was at irst convincing (and that would support the theoretical assumptions concerning the loanwordʼs age and the source language inluencing the rate of assimilation). The results of the individual analyses contradict the assumed “overall trend”. One of the corpora was collected by experienced ield workers, while the other was collected by students. By comparing both corpora, some light can be shed onto the question as to what extent “undirected” and less rigidly collected data can support or complement more extensive and costly research projects.
"Standard language" is a contested concept, ideologically, empirically and theoretically. This is particularly true for a language such as German, where the standardization of the spoken language was based on the written standard and was established with respect to a communicative situation, i.e. public speech on stage (Bühnenaussprache), which most speakers never come across. As a consequence, the norms of the oral standard exhibit many features which are infrequent in the everyday speech even of educated speakers. This paper discusses ways to arrive at a more realistic conception of (spoken) standard German, which will be termed "standard usage". It must be founded on empirical observations of speakers linguistic choices in everyday situations. Arguments in favor of a corpus-based notion of standard have to consider sociolinguistic, political, and didactic concerns. We report on the design of a large study of linguistic variation conducted at the Institute for the German Language (project "Variation in Spoken German", Variation des gesprochenen Deutsch) with the aim of arriving at a representative picture of "standard usage" in contemporary German. It systematically takes into account both diatopic variation covering the multi-national space in which German an official language, and diastratic variation in terms of varying degrees of formality. Results of the study of phonetic and morphosyntactic variation are discussed. At least for German, a corpus-based notion of "standard usage" inevitably includes some degree of pluralism concerning areal variation, and it needs to do justice to register-based variation as well.