Soziolinguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (337)
- Article (204)
- Book (47)
- Review (15)
- Other (11)
- Part of Periodical (5)
- Report (3)
- Working Paper (3)
- Conference Proceeding (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
Language
Has Fulltext
- yes (631) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (337)
- Soziolinguistik (80)
- Sprachgebrauch (61)
- Sprachvariante (48)
- Deutschland (45)
- Sprachwandel (44)
- Mehrsprachigkeit (43)
- Sprache (41)
- Sprachkontakt (38)
- Deutschland <DDR> (35)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (299)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (88)
- Postprint (29)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Ahead of Print (1)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
- Preprint (1)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- de Gruyter (126)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (57)
- Schwann (56)
- Narr (26)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (22)
- Lang (19)
- De Gruyter (16)
- Schmidt (11)
- Winter (11)
- Dudenverlag (10)
Der Beitrag behandelt Schreibvarianten der Gegenwartssprache. Es werden auf der Grundlage von vier Fallgruppen (1. Binnenmajuskel, 2. Kompositaschreibung mit Leerzeichen, 3. Kompositaschreibung mit Bindestrich, 4. genderfokussierende Schreibweisen) zwei Typen von Normvarianz unterschieden – ein politischer und ein unpolitischer. Dabei wird der Frage nachgegangen, ob unpolitische Ad-hoc-Bildungen auf dem Weg der Konventionalisierung sich von als politisch wahrgenommenen Normvarianten unterscheiden. Zur Beschreibung des Phänomens wird der Begriff der elastischen Norm eingeführt, um divergierende Schreibkonventionen im Spannungsfeld von Faktizitätsherstellung und kodifizierter Setzung zu modellieren. Zur soziolinguistischen Unterscheidung von Schreib- und Leseperspektiven werden die Schreibvarianten als drei unterschiedliche Gesten kategorisiert – als unmarkierte Nullgeste, als markierte Nullgeste und als indexikalisierte Signalgeste.
Neographeme wie Genderstern und Doppelpunkt werden zunehmend verwendet, um Personen unabhängig von ihrem Geschlecht einzubeziehen. Der Beitrag beleuchtet diese Sonderzeichen aus semantischer, typographischer und grammatischer Sicht, vergleicht sie mit anderen Typogrammen und diskutiert ihren Morphemstatus. Auch ihre metapragmatische Leistung der sprecherseitigen Verortung kommt in den Blick. In Bezug auf die Rezeption werden aus kognitionslinguistischer Perspektive die Lesbarkeit und die Funktionstüchtigkeit des Sterns betrachtet. Lesenden, die mit der Form vertraut sind, gelingt der Wortzugriff mühelos, und der Genderstern elizitiert inklusive mentale Repräsentationen. Diese Analysen und Befunde sprechen für die grundsätzliche Möglichkeit, Neographeme in die Sprache zu integrieren.
Recent typological studies have shown that socio-linguistic factors have a substantial effect on at least certain structures of language. However, we are still far from understanding how such factors should be operationalized and how they interact with other factors in shaping grammar. To address both questions, this study examines the influence of socio-linguistic factors on the number of dedicated conditional constructions in a sample of 374 languages. We test the number of speakers, the degree of multilingualism, the availability of a literature tradition, the use of writing, and the use of the language in the education system. At the same time, we control for genealogical, contact, and bibliographical biases. Our results suggest that the number of speakers is the most informative predictor. However, we find that the association between the number of speakers and the number of dedicated conditional constructions is much weaker than assumed, once genealogical and contact biases are controlled for.
Ist Deutsch eigentlich die hässlichste Sprache Europas? Dieser Beitrag analysiert, wie die deutsche Sprache im europäischen Raum ästhetisch wahrgenommen wird und was hinter dieser Wahrnehmung sprachwissenschaftlich gesehen steckt.
Die Studie kombiniert qualitative und quantitative Forschungsmethoden miteinander. So werden auf der einen Seite Sprachurteile dokumentiert und analysiert. Auf der anderen Seite wird die durchgeführte europaweite Befragung mit über 2000 Proband*innen ausgewertet, was gleichzeitig einen methodischen Ausgangspunkt für weitere Erhebungen festlegt.
Überwiegt die Wahrnehmung des Deutschen als „harte“ Sprache wirklich? Ist „hart“ denn direkt „hässlich“? Und ist die Wahrnehmung mancher Sprachen als besonders reizlos tatsächlich nur gesellschaftlich konstruiert, wie der bisherige Stand der Forschung nahelegt, oder spielen universelle kognitive Prozesse doch eine größere Rolle als gedacht? Basierend auf einem beträchtlichen Datensatz wirft diese Studie neues Licht auf eine der umstrittensten und methodisch herausforderndsten Kontroversen der Linguistik.
This special issue of the Journal on Ethnopolitics and Minority Issues in Europe (JEMIE) brings together some of the participants of the symposium Political and Economic Resources and Obstacles of Minority Language Maintenance organized by the Language Survival Network ‘POGA’ at Tallinn University, Estonia, in December 2010. More than 20 scholars representing linguistics, anthropology, social sciences and law participated in the symposium, to present papers and discuss questions related to minority language loss, maintenance and revitalization. The six case studies contained in this special issue look at different minorities and regions in the European Union, Russia and the US. The linguistic communities discussed are the Russian-, Võru/Seto- and Latgalian-speaking minorities of Estonia and Latvia; the Welsh- and Breton-speaking communities of the Celtic language; the Russian Finno-Ugrian people with regional autonomies; and the native American groups of the Delaware/Cherokee and the Oneida. The reader will find articles relating to interdisciplinary research approaches in and on minority languages and minority language communities.
Less than one percent of words would be affected by gender-inclusive language in German press texts
(2024)
Research on gender and language is tightly knitted to social debates on gender equality and non-discriminatory language use. Psycholinguistic scholars have made significant contributions in this field. However, corpus-based studies that investigate these matters within the context of language use are still rare. In our study, we address the question of how much textual material would actually have to be changed if non-gender-inclusive texts were rewritten to be gender-inclusive. This quantitative measure is an important empirical insight, as a recurring argument against the use of gender-inclusive German is that it supposedly makes written texts too long and complicated. It is also argued that gender-inclusive language has negative effects on language learners. However, such effects are only likely if gender-inclusive texts are very different from those that are not gender-inclusive. In our corpus-linguistic study, we manually annotated German press texts to identify the parts that would have to be changed. Our results show that, on average, less than 1% of all tokens would be affected by gender-inclusive language. This small proportion calls into question whether gender-inclusive German presents a substantial barrier to understanding and learning the language, particularly when we take into account the potential complexities of interpreting masculine generics.
This paper focuses on language change based on shifting social norms, in particular with regard to the debate on language and gender. It is a recurring argument in this debate that language develops "naturally" and that "severe interventions" - such as gender-inclusive language is often claimed to be - in the allegedly "organic" language system are inappropriate and even "dangerous". Such interventions are, however, not unprecedented. Socially motivated processes of language change are neither unusual nor new. We focus in our contribution on one important political-social space in Germany, the German Bundestag. Taking other struggles about language and gender in the plenaries of the Bundestag as a starting point, our article illustrates that language and gender has been a recurring issue in the German Bundestag since the 1980s. We demonstrate how this is reflected in linguistic practices of the Bundestag, by the use of a) designations for gays and lesbians; b) pair forms such as Bürgerinnen und Bürger (female and male citizens); and c) female forms of addresses and personal nouns ('Präsidentin' in addition to 'Präsident'). Lastly, we will discuss implications of these earlier language battles for the currently very heated debate about gender-inclusive language, especially regarding new forms with gender symbols like the asterisk or the colon (Lehrer*innen, Lehrer:innen; male*female teachers) which are intended to encompass all gender identities.
Our paper discusses family language policies among multilingual families in Latvia with Russian as home language. The presentation is based on three case studies, i.e. interviews conducted with Russophones who have chosen to send their children to Latvian-medium pre-schools and schools. The main aim is to understand practices and regards among such families “from below,” i.e. which family-internal and family-external factors influenced the choice of Latvian-medium education and what impact this choice has on linguistic practices.
The paper shows that there have been critical events which both encouraged and discouraged the choice of Latvian-medium education. The wish to integrate into mainstream society has been met by obstacles both from ethnic Russians and Latvians. Yet, the three families consider their choices to be the right ones for the future development of their children in a multiethnic Latvia in which Latvian serves as the unifying language of society.
Aims and objectives:
Language debates in Latvia often focus on the role of Latvian as official and main societal language. Yet, Latvian society is highly multilingual, and families with home languages other than Latvian have to choose between different educational trajectories for their children. In this context, this paper discusses the results of two studies which addressed the question of why families with Russian as a home language choose (pre)schools with languages other than Russian as medium of instruction (MOI). The first study analyses family narratives which provide insight into attitudes and practices which lead to the decision to send children to Latvian-MOI institutions. The second study investigates language attitudes and practices by families in the international community of Riga German School.
Methodology:
The paper discusses data gathered during two studies: for the first, semi-structed interviews were conducted with Russian-speaking families who choose Latvian-medium schools for their children. For the second study, a survey was carried out in the community of an international school in Riga, sided by ethnographic observations and interviews with teachers and the school leadership.
Data and analysis:
Interviews and ethnographic observations were subjected to a discourse analysis with a focus on critical events and structures of life trajectory narratives. Survey data were processed following simple statistical analysis and qualitative content analysis.
Findings/conclusions:
Our data reveal that families highly embrace multilingualism and see the development of individual plurilingualism as important for integration into Latvian society as well as for educational and professional opportunities in the multilingual societies of Latvia and Europe. At the same time, multilingualism and multiculturalism, including Russian, are seen as a value in itself. In addition, our studies reflect the bidirectionality of family language policies in interplay with practices in educational institutions: family decisions influence children’s language acquisition at school, but the school also has an impact on the families’ language practices at home. In sum, we argue that educational policies should therefore pay justice to the wishes of families in Latvia to incorporate different language aspects into individual educational trajectories.
Originality:
Language policy is a frequent topic of investigation in the Baltic states. However, there has been a lack in research on family language policy and school choices. In this vein, our paper adds to the understanding of educational choices and language policy processes among Russian-speaking families and the international community in Latvia.