400 Sprache, Linguistik
Refine
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Conference Proceeding (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Keywords
- typology (3) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (3)
Publisher
- De Gruyter (1)
- Franz Steiner (1)
- North-West University (1)
Besides English, Afrikaans is considered “the [Germanic] language which deviates grammatically the farthest from the others” (Harbert 2007: 17). But how exactly do we measure “grammatical deviation”, and how deviant is Afrikaans really if we compare it not just to other standard languages but also to non-standard varieties? The present contribution aims to address those questions combining functional-typological and dialectometric perspectives. We first select data for 28 Germanic varieties showing vastly different speaker numbers, grades of standardisation and amounts of language contact. Based on 48 (micro)typological variables from syntax, morphology and phonology, we perform cluster analysis and multidimensional scaling and present ways of visualizing and interpreting the results. Inter alia, the analyses show a major divide between Continental West Germanic and North Germanic (as might be expected) and they also identify a number of outliers, including English and pidgin and creole languages such as Russenorsk or Rabaul Creole German. Afrikaans appears to cluster with the other West Germanic languages rather than the outliers. Within West Germanic, however, it does indeed emerge as rather deviant and, according to our metric, it is, for example, typologically closer to other high-contact varieties such as Yiddish than it is to Dutch.
Dieser Aufsatz diskutiert die Frage, inwieweit Unserdeutsch sich aus soziohistorischer und sprachstruktureller Perspektive in die Kategorie Kreolsprache einfügt. Als tertium comparationis dienen dabei Merkmale, die in der einschlägigen Literatur prominent als charakteristisch für Kreolsprachen angenommen werden. Es zeigt sich, dass Unserdeutsch trotz einer Reihe atypischer Entstehungsumstände, die auf den ersten Blick eine große strukturelle Nähe zum deutschen Superstrat, damit ein relativ akrolektales Kreol erwarten ließen, verhältnismäßig gut mit dem Muster eines Average Creole, wie es sich etwa aufgrund der Daten des „Atlas of Pidgin and Creole Language Structures“ (Michaelis et al. 2013) abzeichnet, harmoniert. Eine mögliche Erklärung findet diese augenfällige Diskrepanz in der primären Funktion von Unserdeutsch als Identitätsmarker und der linguistischen Struktur seiner Substratsprache Tok Pisin.
Information theory can be used to assess how efficiently a message is transmitted on the basis of different symbolic systems. In this paper, I estimate the information-theoretic efficiency of written language for parallel text data in more than 1000 different languages, both on the level of characters and on the level of words as information encoding units. The main results show that (i) the median efficiency is ∼29% on the character level and ∼45% on the word level, (ii) efficiency on both levels is strongly correlated with each other and (iii) efficiency tends to be higher for languages with more speakers.