Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T05:48:06.643Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Case Syncretism in Pennsylvania German: Internal or External Forces at Play?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Silke Van Ness
Silke Van Ness
Affiliation:
University at Albany State University of New YorkDepartment of Germanic and Slavic Languages and Literatures1400 Washington Ave.Alabany, New York 12222 [sv478@cnsvax.albany.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Reduction of case morphology is not unusual in the history of languages, especially Germanic. What sets Pennsylvania German apart from an otherwise routine process is the fact that two distinct communities are reflecting two distinctly different developments in their case system—one group, the nonsectarians, is linguistically conservative; the other, the sectarians, is innovative. Therefore, it has been suggested that the internal argument for change is not applicable to Pennsylvania German; rather, the linguistic innovation of the sectarians is indicative of external pressure brought about by bilingualism. This paper argues that the reduction in case markings cannot neatly be assigned to one theory or another; instead, it is a combination of factors acting in tandem to bring about change. Data from Ohio, where case markings have been contracted more recently, provide the link, which points to “multiple causation” as the basis for morphological loss. Quantitative and qualitative evidence is presented from sectarian and nonsectarian groups in Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Spring 1996 , pp. 1 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aitchison, Jean. 1991. Language change: Progress or decay? 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Andersen, Roger W. 1982. Determining the linguistic attributes of language attrition. The loss of language skills, ed. by Lambert, D. and Freed, B., 44–59. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1968. Die deutsche Sprache. 14th edn.Halle (Saale): VEB Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Berend, Nina and Jedig, Hugo (eds.). 1991. Deutsche Mundarten in der Sowjetunion: Geschichte und Bibliographie. Marburg: Elwert.Google Scholar
Born, Renate. 1989. The Michigan Franconians: A neglected German language island. Michigan Germanic Studies 15.1–20.Google Scholar
Buchheit, Robert H. 1978. Mennonite Plautdietsch: A phonological and morphological description of a settlement dialect in York and Hamilton Counties, Nebraska. Dissertation, University of Nebraska.Google Scholar
Buffington, Albert F. 1937. Pennsylvania German: A grammatical and linguistic study of the dialect. Dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Buffington, Albert F. 1939. Pennsylvania German: Its relation to other German dialects. American Speech 14.217–52.Google Scholar
Buffington, Albert F. and Barba, Preston A.. 1954. A Pennsylvania German grammar. Allentown, PA: Schlechter's.Google Scholar
Clausing, Stephen. 1986. English influence on American German and on American Icelandic. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Costello, John R. 1985. Pennsylvania German and English: Languages in contact. In Kloss (ed.), 111–20.Google Scholar
Costello, John R. 1986. Diglossia at twilight: German and Pennsylvania “Dutch” in the mid-nineteenth century. Studies on the languages and the verbal behavior of the Pennsylvania Germans I, ed. by Enninger, W., 1–24. (Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Beihefte, 51.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Donnermeyer, Joseph F. and Kreps, George M.. 1993. Occupational change among Ohio's Amish. Paper presented at Three Hundred Years of Persistence and Change: Amish Society 1693–1993, Elizabethtown College (PA), July 22–25, 1993.Google Scholar
Dorian, Nancy. 1980. Language shift in community and individual: The phenomenon of the laggard semi-speaker. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 25.85–94.Google Scholar
Dorian, Nancy. 1989. The nature and scope of changes in the Pennsylvania German of two multi-generational kin networks: The noun phrase. Studies on the languages and the verbal behavior of the Pennsylvania Germans II, ed. by Enninger, W., Raith, J., and Wandt, K-H., 41–70. (Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Beihefte, 64.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Eichhoff, Jürgen. 1971. German in Wisconsin. In Gilbert (ed.), 44–57.Google Scholar
Eikel, Fred Jr. 1949. The use of cases in New Braunfels German. American Speech 24.278–81.Google Scholar
Eikel, Fred Jr. 1954. The New Braunfels German dialect. Dissertation, Johns Hopkins University.Google Scholar
Ferré, B. Meister. 1991. Stability and change in the Pennsylvania German dialect of an Old Order Amish community in Lancaster County. Dissertation, University of Georgia.Google Scholar
Freeouf, Peter. 1989. Religion and dialect: Catholic and Protestant dialects in the German of Dubois County, Indiana. Dissertation, Indiana University.Google Scholar
Frey, William J. 1941. The German dialect of Eastern York County. Dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
Frey, William J. 1945. Amish triple talk. American Speech 20.85–98.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Glenn G. (ed.). 1971. The German language in America. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Gingerich, E. 1988. Ohio Amish directory. Berlin, OH: Hiland Press.Google Scholar
Green, W. A. I. 1989. The dialects of the Palatinate (Das Pfälzische). The dialects of Modern German: A linguistic survey, ed. by Russ, Charles V. J., 241–64. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Haag, Earl C. 1982. A Pennsylvania German reader and grammar. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Harbaugh, Henry. 1870. Harbaugh's Harfe. Philadelphia: Reformed Church Publication Board.Google Scholar
Harter, T. H. 1904. Boonastile: A volume of legend, story and song in Pennsylvania Dutch. Bellefonte, PA: T. H. Harter.Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1987. Danish, Norwegian, and Swedish. The world's major languages, ed. by Comrie, Bernard, 157–79. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Henn, Beate. 1980. Pfälzisch. Düsseldorf: Pädagogischer Verlag Schwann.Google Scholar
Hostetler, John A. 1993. Amish society. 4th edn.Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huffines, Marion L. 1980. Pennsylvania German: Maintenance and shift. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 25.43–57.Google Scholar
Huffines, Marion L. 1989. Case usage among the Pennsylvania German sectarians and nonsectarians. Investigating obsolescence: Studies in language contraction and death, ed. by Dorian, Nancy C., 211–26. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huffines, Marion L. 1991. Translation: A vehicle for change? Evidence from Pennsylvania German. AJGLL 3.175–94.Google Scholar
Kloss, Heinz. 1985. Sprachkonservative Religionsgemeinschaften. In Kloss (ed.), 127–37.Google Scholar
Kloss, Heinz (ed.). 1985. Deutsch als Muttersprache in den Vereinigten Staaten. Teil 2. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
König, Werner. 1985. dtv-Atlas zur deutschen Sprache. 6th edn.Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.Google Scholar
Kuhns, Oscar. 1901. The German and Swiss settlements of colonial Pennsylvania: A study of the so-called Pennsylvania Dutch. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Learned, Marion Dexter. 1988–1989. The Pennsylvania German dialect. Rpt. in American Journal of Philology 9.64–83, 178–97, 326–39, 425–56; 10.288–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Brian. 1992. Swiss German in Wisconsin: The assessment in changes in case marking. Yearbook of German-American Studies 27.1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louden, Mark L. 1988. Bilingualism and syntactic change in Pennsylvania German. Dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
Luthy, David. 1992. Amish settlements across America: 1991. Family Life, April 1992, 19–24.Google Scholar
Niemeyer, Lucien and Kraybill, Donald B.. 1993. Old Order Amish: Their enduring way of life. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Post, Rudolf. 1992. Pfälzisch: Einführung in eine Sprachlandschaft. Landau/Pfalz: Pfälzische Verlagsanstalt.Google Scholar
Raith, Joachim. 1982. Sprachgemeinschaft, Sprachkontakt, Sprachgebrauch. (Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Beihefte, 36.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Rauch, E. H. 1879. Pennsylvania Deitsch Hond-Booch. Mauch Chunk, PA: E. H. Rauch.Google Scholar
Reed, Carroll E. 1941. The Pennsylvania German dialect spoken in the counties of Lehigh and Berks: Phonology and morphology. Dissertation, Brown University.Google Scholar
Salmons, Joseph C. 1983. Issues in Texas German language maintenance and shift. Monatshefte 75.187–96.Google Scholar
Seel, Helga. 1988. Lexikologische Studien zum Pennsylvaniadeutschen. (Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Beihefte, 61.) Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Seifert, Lester W. J. 1941. The Pennsylvania German dialect spoken in the counties of Lehigh and Berks: Vocabulary. Dissertation, Brown University.Google Scholar
Seifert, Lester W. J. 1971. The word geography of Pennsylvania German: Extent and causes. In Gilbert (ed.), 14–42.Google Scholar
Shetter, William Z. 1965. Introduction to Dutch. 2nd edn.The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Shier, Martha. 1965. Case systems in German dialects. Language 41.420–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey and Kaufman, Terrence. 1988. Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Van Ness, Silke. 1992. The New Order Amish in Ohio: A grammatical change in progress. Diachronic studies on the languages of the Anabaptists, ed. by Burridge, K. and Enninger, W., 182–98. (Bochum-Essener Beiträge zur Sprachforschung, 27.) Bochum: Universitätsverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Van Ness, Silke. 1993. Advances toward a new pronominal grammar in an Ohio Amish community. Word 44.193–203.Google Scholar
Van Ness, Silke. 1995. Ohio Amish women in the vanguard of a language change: Pennsylvania German in Ohio. American Speech 70.69–80.Google Scholar