Deutsche Mundarten
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (44) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (44)
Keywords
- Deutsch (23)
- Mundart (12)
- Standardsprache (10)
- Rezension (7)
- Sprachvariante (7)
- Niederdeutsch (6)
- Dialekt (5)
- Sprachgeschichte (5)
- Dialektologie (4)
- Gesprochene Sprache (3)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (15)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (9)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (15)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (12)
Publisher
- Steiner (6)
- de Gruyter (4)
- Heliand (3)
- Akademie Verlag (2)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (2)
- MDPI (2)
- Pfälzerbund (2)
- BGDV (1)
- Bibliographisches Institut (1)
- Blackwell Publishing (1)
Sprache im Gepäck. Von den vielfältigen Dialekten der Deutschen in der ehemaligen Sowjetunion
(2021)
Im Gepäck der etwa 2,5 Millionen der in den letzten rund dreißig Jahren in die Bundesrepublik eingewanderten (Spät-)Aussiedler aus Staaten der ehemaligen Sowjetunion befand sich ein großes immaterielles Erbe. Dieses war nicht auf alle gleichermaßen verteilt, bei dem einen mehr, bei der anderen weniger spürbar und ist immer weniger geworden. Es handelt sich dabei um die mitgebrachten »russlanddeutschen« Dialekte. Was sind das für Dialekte und wer spricht sie noch?
The European language world is characterized by an ideology of monolingualism and national languages. This language-related world view interacts with social debates and definitions about linguistic autonomy, diversity, and variation. For the description of border minorities and their sociolinguistic situation, however, this view reaches its limits. In this article, the conceptual difficulties with a language area that crosses national borders are examined. It deals with the minority in East Lorraine (France) in particular. On the language-historical level, this minority is closely related to the language of its (big) neighbor Germany. At the same time, it looks back on a conflictive history with this country, has never filled a (subordinated) political–administrative unit, and has experienced very little public support. We want to address the questions of how speakers themselves reflect on their linguistic situation and what concepts and argumentative figures they bring up in relation to what (Germanic) variety. To this end, we look at statements from guideline-based interviews. In the paper, we present first observations gained through qualitative content analysis.
This paper explores how attitudes affect the seemingly objective process of counting speakers of varieties using the example of Low German, Germany’s sole regional language. The initial focus is on the basic taxonomy of classifying a variety as a language or a dialect. Three representative surveys then provide data for the analysis: the Germany Survey 2008, the Northern Germany Survey 2016, and the Germany Survey 2017. The results of these surveys indicate that there is no consensus concerning the evaluation of Low German’s status and that attitudes towards Low German are related to, for example, proficiency in the language. These attitudes are shown to matter when counting speakers of Low German and investigating the status it has been accorded.
Historiquement, les variétés germaniques de la Moselle-Est (ancienne région Lorraine) font partie du continuum dialectal de l’allemand. Après la Seconde Guerre mondiale, leur utilisation (y compris celle de l’allemand standard) a été fortement réprimée et la francisation résolument poursuivie. Depuis quelques décennies maintenant, des efforts ont été faits pour élever les dialectes de la Moselle-Est au statut de langue indépendante afin de marquer une distance par rapport à la langue allemande, de permettre leur identification et de pouvoir les réutiliser. Le paysage linguistique donne une bonne indication de la manière dont coexistent les différents groupes linguistiques et une indication sur le statut de leurs langues. Dans le cadre d’une analyse qualitative, les contextes d’apparition, les fonctions et les auteurs des éléments linguistiques visibles dans l’espace public en allemand standard et dialectal seront discutés pour la Moselle-Est. Il s’avère qu’ils constituent des exceptions notables, distribuées de manière significative. L’allemand (standard) apparaît dans les inscriptions historiques ainsi que dans le domaine des relations internationales, et est donc implicitement exogénéisé. En revanche, on trouve le dialecte (appelé « platt ») dans des contextes ayant des références locales et portant sur des aspects identitaires.
Zur Erforschung der generationsbedingten Variation im pfälzischen Sprachinseldialekt am Niederrhein
(2012)
Über "Diglossie"
(1976)
Traditionally, research on language change has been a post-mortem activity, focused on isolated changes that are complete and often only documented in written texts. In the 1960s the field was advanced considerably by Labovian sociolinguistics and the investigation of “change in progress” adduced through patterns of community-internal linguistic variation correlated with external facts about speakers such as age and class (see Labov 1994 for an overview). However, despite the many benefits of such work on “dynamic synchrony,” we still know relatively little about how language change unfolds over the lifetimes of individual speakers, that is, in real time (cf. Bailey et al. 1991). The logistical challenges of such research are, of course, considerable. Whereas it is straightforward for psycholinguists to observe language development in children over the course of a few years, documenting changes in the verbal behavior of individuals over several decades is by contrast much less feasible. Nevertheless, present theoretical models of language change could be considerably improved by the results of real-time studies.
The most important modern research on characteristic features and the history of language usage in Berlin are those of Agathe Lasch and Hermann Tetjchebt. Both authors disagree on the question of Upper Saxon influence on early Berlin language. As early as the end of the 18th century there was a lively discussion of problems concerning the representative standard of German pronunciation and other regional differences by teachers of Berlin grammar schools. They recommended a Northern German variant of pronunciation instead of the traditional Saxon one. The membership of the Royal Academy of Sciences gave them an occasion to find a public audience and to produce a noticeable effect.
When collecting linguistic data using translation tasks, stimuli can be presented in written or in oral form. In doing so, there is a possibility that a systematic source of error can occur that can be traced back to the selected survey method and which can influence the results of the translation tasks. This contribution investigates whether and to what extent both of the aforementioned survey methods result in divergent results when using translation tasks. For this investigation, 128 informants provided linguistic data; each informant had to translate 25 Wenker sentences from Standard German into either East Swabian, Lechrain or West Central Bavarian dialect, as the case may be. The results show two tendencies. First, written stimuli lead to a slightly higher number of dialectal translation in segmental variables. Second, when oral stimuli are used, syntactic and lexical variables are translated significantly more often in such a manner that they diverge from the template. The results can be explained in terms of varying cognitive processing operations and the constraints of human working memory. When collecting data in the future, these tendencies should be taken into account.