Subjective Assessment Of Dialects In The Terminology Of German Dialectology

Abstract

The article discusses the problem of relations to a dialect as an extralinguistic factor, which not only contributed to the emergence of German dialectology as a linguistic discipline but also influenced the formation of terminology in the field of German dialectology. At the beginning of the article, a brief excursion is given about how dialectology has been revived as a science. Supporters of a populist point of view created lists of dialectisms that needed to be avoided in speech. Other scientists constituted dictionaries to preserve dialects as cultural heritage. One way or another, both approaches are a negative or positive attitude towards regional varieties of language - the cause of the creation of historical literary monuments, which served as the foundation for the formation of dialectology as science. Within the framework of social dialectology and perceptual dialectology, the study of such a phenomenon as a subjective assessment of the dialect took a separate niche, which is evidenced by the formation of many terminological nests reflecting a positive or negative assessment of the dialect. As an output, it is noted that the formation and development of the German dialectology and its terminological corps affected not only the attitude towards the dialect of its carriers but also the scientists of dialectologists. The article discusses the dependence of scientific knowledge on the influence of extralinguistic factors the relation to the dialect.

Keywords: Dialect, dialectology, terminology, relation to dialect, social dialectology, term

Introduction

Dialectology of the German language is a relatively young discipline; its history goes back more than two hundred years. However, in the last decade, we have seen an active development of the science of dialects and its directions - dialect grammar, dialect phonetics, dialect geography, social dialectology, dialectometry, and perceptual dialectology, which contributed to the formation of many terminological vocabularies. The study and order of this vocabulary imply the study of the features of its formation and the factors influencing the formation of certain terms.

Problem Statement

At the early stage of the formation of dialectological science, the focus was on the geographical and normative study of dialects. The dialect was identified with the common people and was considered a sign of ignorance. The first scientific term, dialectal dictionaries, attempts to systematically describe differences in regional varieties of the language and, finally, respect for these regional dialects became prerequisites and a necessary condition for the emergence of not only dialectological science, but also its terminology. An important role in the formation of several terminological units was played by the attitude towards the dialect itself.

Research Questions

The study of any scientific branch of knowledge implies the study of its tools, that is, the terminological corpus of vocabulary, which is a kind of instrument for the transfer of knowledge and exchange of information between specialists. A comprehensive analysis of this vocabulary allows not only to systematize scientific knowledge but also to predict the possible direction of development of terminological nests of terms, as well as science itself. One of the factors influencing the formation of dialectology and its terminology is the attitude towards the dialect.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this article is to identify the dependence of the formation of terminological vocabulary on extralinguistic factors the subjective assessment of dialect speakers and dialectologists.

Research Methods

The methodological basis includes the use of methods of comparative historical, typological analysis. The systematic approach makes it possible to study the features of the formation of terminological fields.

Findings

The formation of dialectology of the German language as a science falls at the beginning of the 19th century (Senina & Merkurieva, 2020). However, the formation of a scientific discipline on regional varieties of the language was preceded by a long period of collection and analysis of existing dialectal features, which is due, among other things, to several extralinguistic factors, among which an important role is related to the dialect itself.

From the middle of the 16th century. the dialect was perceived by representatives of the upper social strata as a "spoiled" written language (verderbte Schriftsprache) and was associated with the peasantry and lack of education. In the 17th and 18th centuries. the disdain for regional varieties of the language reaches its climax. Thus, Adelung (1781) considers the Low German dialect a “relic of culture” (Überbleibsel der Kultur), and the High German dialect the most beautiful, harmonious, and pleasant (p. 79). Heinatz believes that High German is the only model to strive for (Heynatz, 1774, p. 34). During this time, numerous grammars of the German language were created. Even though writers strive to introduce elements of colloquial speech into the written language, and stylistics regulate the use of colloquial elements of the language in written speech and allow this very possibility, the inclusion of a dialect in written speech remains unacceptable, and speakers of the dialect (primarily the peasants) are ridiculed.

In the 18th century. opposition to the negative attitude towards the dialect begins to form. In 1700 Leibniz points out the importance of dialects. Many dialectologists consider him the main initiator of the new "dialectal consciousness" (Dialektbewusstseins). Leibniz calls for the collection of lexical material in all regions, which is, first, of historical value, since it is dialect words, phrases, and sentences that contain an explanation of the meanings of general literary vocabulary. All projects of his dialectological dictionaries remained unfulfilled, but the scientist's calls significantly influenced the thinking of many researchers, and their works became the foundation for the creation of the science of dialects.

In one way or another, both approaches contributed to the formation of the first dialectal dictionaries. Purists have compiled lists of dialectisms to avoid in speech, and these materials have become important treasures of historical dialectology. In the 16th century. the first dialect dictionaries appear, such as Petri-Glossar (1523), Mithridates. De Differentiislinguarum (1555), Glossarium Bavaricum (1689), Idioticon Hamburgense (1755), etc. Later, many dictionaries were called Idiotikon, Idiotismensammlungen, and dialect vocabulary - Idiotismen, Idiotika from Greek idiotikon special "means" a list of features of a particular dialect).

The work of many dialectologists is not only in the study of dialectal peculiarities but also in the purposeful efforts to preserve them. Along with the compilation of many dictionaries of dialect vocabulary, many projects and conferences are organized. As part of supporting the "prestige of the dialect" (Dialektprestige), scientists emphasize the importance of "reviving the dialect" (Wiederbelebung des Dialektes, Dialektbelebung), preserving the dialect (Mundartbewahrung, Dialekterhalt), supporting the dialect (Dialektförderung). Many publications and scientific symposia are devoted to the need to study the dialect (Dialektbeherrschung, Dialekterwerb, Mundartbeherrschung, Mundarterwerb), “dialect transmission” (Dialektweitergabe), “dialect education” (Dialekterziehung), as well as the adoption of certain measures to form dialect dialectal consciousness (Mundartbewußtsein) and dialectal loyalty (Dialektloyalität).

Many terminological vocabularies denote the status of the dialect and the peculiarities of the relationship to regional varieties of the language. The traditional attitude to the dialect as the language of the uneducated strata of society has formed a negative assessment of the use of regional forms and, as a result, the avoidance of using them in speech, which is denoted in the scientific literature as Dialektvermeidung, Dialektverachtung, Dialektmisbrauch, Geringerwertigkeit des Dialetigtes, Dialektnivematllisierung. Dialectologists pay special attention to the problem of “dialectal barriers” arising in connection with the avoidance of regional forms (Dialektbarriere, dialektale Barriere, dialektbedingte Sprachbarriere), which are defined as “angenommene Behinderung von Dialektsprechernbeim Erwerb der Standardspr. aufgrund von Asymmetrie der Systemebzw. Negative Bewertung des Dialekts "(the alleged difficulty of the speakers of the dialect in mastering the literary language due to the asymmetry of systems or negative assessment of the dialect "- hereinafter, our translation. - I. V., G. A., V. V.) (Glück, 2016, p. 146).

The regional component in the formation of attitudes towards the dialect is pointed out by Merkurieva (2004): “In percentage terms, the south remains more located to the dialect (dialect freundlich), and the north - less (dialektarm)” (p. 23). Siebenhaar (1996) believes that it is inappropriate to use the terms H (igh) -Varietät and L (ow) -Varietät to designate the literary language and the Swiss dialect as languages ​​with high and lower prestige, since their relationship is a mediale Diglossie.

Scientists-dialectologists note the formation of dialect prestige. Using the example of the Low German variant, Denkler describes the speaker's position in the direction of Dialekt - Standard:

Das Niederdeutschewirdnämlich von Dialektsprechernim Münsterland (wie eigentlich in ganz Norddeutschland) als warm, gemütlich, heimatlich, freundlich, deftigusw. bewertet, was natürlich auf der Tatsacheberuht, dass das Niederdeutscheausschließlichals “Nähesprache“ verwendet wird. … Das Hochdeutschewird von immerweniger Dialektsprechern mit „eingebildet, hochnäsig“ assozierrt. Die meistensehen Hochdeutschjetztals die „normale“, alltägliche Sprache. Daneben haften dem Hochdeutschen aber auch typische distanz sprachliche Assoziationen an, wie „öffentliche, formell, fremd“ usw. in general, and throughout northern Germany) as warm, cozy, homely, friendly, mischievous, etc., which, of course, is explained by the fact that Low German is used exclusively as a “language of intimacy” ... The literary language is less and less associated by speakers of the dialect as “arrogant and arrogant”. Most now consider the literary language “normal”, everyday language. At the same time, such typical associations of distance perception as “official, formal, foreign”, etc. are attributed to the literary language”) (Denkler, 2007, p. 186).

Merkuryeva writes about the functioning of the German dialect on the territory of Germany at present: "Now the dialect is primarily a private language, the language of family communication, and only after that is it a sign of insufficient education, rural origin and a certain native region" (Merkurieva, 2004, p. 51). Thus, in the case of a “friendly”, “cozy” conversation, preference is given to the dialect as a “language of intimacy”. This phenomenon is designated by German dialectologists as Mundartbevorzugung (Niebaum & Macha, 2014) or Dialektpräferenz (Hochholzer, 2015) - the preferred use of the dialect. If speakers try to avoid especially pronounced dialectal signs in speech, dialect convergence (Dialektkonvergenz) occurs - if there is a literary language-roof, then often contact in the dialect occurs in convergence towards the literary language. The opposite phenomenon is dialect divergence (Dialektdivergenz) when both linguistic varieties move away. This happens when you need to avoid resemblance during communication.

The choice of the linguistic form of the speaker, as well as the explanation of some mechanisms of dialect interference, are studied in the framework of the study of concepts such as the study of dialect perception (Dialektperzeptionsstudie), “assessment” of the dialect (Dialekteinschätzung), “image” of the dialect (Dialektimage) or “dialect stereotype” (Dialektyp):

“Preferenzen gegenüber einer regionalenVarietätkönnenauchals Image eines Dialekts (dialect image) bezeichnet werden. Werden Sprecher einer Dialektregion (sozial) stigmatisiert, kann auch von einem Negativimage gesprochen werden. Imumgekehrten Fall, d.h.wenneineregionale Sprechweise favorisiert und in Zusammenhang mit der Standardvarietät gebraucht wird, wird diese als Prestigevarietät designiert” stigmatized, one can speak of a negative regional image, otherwise, i.e., if the regional variant is preferred and used along with the literary language, we are talking about a prestigious dialect”) (Anders, 2010, p. 39).

In the aspect of social dialectology, not only the individual characteristics of the use of the dialect are considered, but also the attitude towards it in society. Opponents of the dialect are designated in the scientific literature as dialektfeindlich (hostile to the dialect), Dialektfeind (opponent of the dialect), and supporters and loyal to regional varieties of the language - Dialektfreund, Dialektbefürworter, Mundartbefürworter, Dialektchloyale,

The concept of "dialect support" (Mundartpflege, Dialektpflege) is widely used, which is classified in scientific works on dialectology as follows:

1) True dialect preservation (echte Dialektpflege):

- traditional preservation of the dialect (traditionelle Dialektpflege): conservative (preservation of the basic dialect) and progressive (oriented towards preservation of the dialect);

- modern preservation of the dialect (zeitgemäße Dialektpflege): preserving and increasing the authority of the dialect as an independent and equal variety of language, strengthening or promoting the formation of dialect consciousness and dialect loyalty;

2) Quasi-dialect preservation (Quasi-Dialektpflege): unconscious preservation of the dialect;

3) Pseudo-Dialektpflege: Dialect abuse (Bräuer, 2015, p. 278)

The popularity and relevance of the term Dialektpflege are indicated by its derivative ability, as well as the ability to create large terminological series:

Mundartpfleger - the keeper of the dialect;

Mundartpflegerischer Diskurs– dialect preservation discourse;

Mundartpflegerische Kritik - criticism of the preservation of the dialect;

Mundartpflegerische Bemühungen - efforts to preserve the dialect;

Dialektpfleger - the keeper of the dialect;

dialektpflegerische Motivation - motivation for the preservation of the dialect;

dialektpflegerische Aktivitäten - activities for the preservation of the dialect;

dialektpflegerische Strömung - a direction for the preservation of the dialect;

dialektpflegerische Wirkung - impact of dialect conservation measures;

dialektpflegerische Einstellung - a point of view supporting the preservation of the dialect;

dialektpflegerische Strategie - dialect preservation strategy;

dialektpflegerische Aktivitäten - measures to preserve the dialect;

dialektpflegerisches Netzwerk - dialect preservation system.

Ammon (2006), using the example of the Swiss version of the German language, distinguishes such a phenomenon as “dialect purism” (Dialektpurismus) - a phenomenon in which a dialect in diglossia with its own literary remains preserved and “pure” (p. 1767).

It is noteworthy that dialectologists often use the concept of "dialect waves" (Dialektwellen), which denote "periods of particularly bright flourishing of the dialect" (Merkurieva, 2004, p. 25). Several researchers even speak of a dialectal renaissance (Dialektrenaissance, Mundartrenaissance):

“Der mit den Begriffen Dialektverfall und Mundartrenaissance verbundene Sprachwandelist nicht zuletzt mit veränderten Spracheinstellungen bzw. Dialekteinstellungen zu erklären. Damit begründetsichunser Interesse sowohl an den Formen und Inhaltenexistenter Einstellungen wie auch an den Prozessen, Ursachen, Folgen von Einstellungsänderungen, die im Bewusstsein des Individuumsstattfinden”.

Changes in the language associated with the concepts of the disintegration of a dialect or dialect renaissance are explained not least of all by a changed attitude to the language or dialect. Thus, our interest is based not only on the forms and contents of existing positions, but also on the processes, causes, consequences of changes in attitudes that occur in the mind of the individual. (Krause & Sternkopf, 2000, p. 191)

The study of subjective data and subjective interpretation of linguistic reality entailed the creation of such a direction as perceptual dialectology, or dialectology of perception (Sprecherdialektologie, Dialektologie der Dialektsprecher, Dialektologie der Nicht-Dialektshprecher, Laiendialektologie, Perseptionshologie). Many scientists consider this direction an independent discipline describing the cognitive structures of everyday knowledge, along with dialectography as a linguistic description of regional speech styles, dialect geography as an aerial description of regional speech styles, and social dialectology as a description of social stratification positions itself as the fourth subsection of synchronous dialectology (Anders, 2010, p. 3) ... In perceptual dialectology, to describe terminological phenomena and processes, many terms are used with components with a subjektiv component:

Subjektives Dialektareal - subjective dialect area,

Subjective Dialektgrenze - subjective dialect boundary,

Subjective Dialektregion - subjective dialectal area,

Subjektiver Dialektraum - subjective dialectal space,

Subjective Dialektraumkonstruktion - subjective construction of dialectal space;

Subjective Dialektverortnung - subjective distribution of dialects in the area,

Subjective Dialektalität - subjective dialect,

Subjektiver Dialektalitätsgrad - the subjective degree of dialectality,

Subjective Dialektalitätshierarchie - subjective hierarchy of dialectality, etc.

But despite the constituent subjektiv in the given term combinations, they do not reflect the specifics of the attitude towards the dialect itself, but only a terminological description of those phenomena that characterize the assessment of dialectal processes by non-professional dialectologists.

It is important to note that the attitude towards the dialect has become not only a scientific problem for the description by dialectologists, but also formed the basis for many symposia and conferences aimed at supporting the preservation of the dialect as a historical cultural heritage. Examples of this are such events as “Dialekt und regionale Kulturforschung” Tübingen, 2006 (“Dialect and regional study of culture” Tübingen, 2006), “Gefährdete Sprachen und Dialekte” München, 2013 (“Endangered languages ​​and dialects” Munich, 2013), “Dialekt-Namen – Mundartim Kontext der Onomastik” Regensburg, 2017 (“Dialectal names - dialect in the context of onomastics” Regensburg, 2017), Deitsch, Dütsch, Deutsch: Deutsch als Zweitspracheim Dialekt-Standard-Kontinuum / -Spektrum des Deutschen Wien, 2019 (Deitsch, Dütsch, Deutsch: German as a second language in the German dialect-literary language spectrum, Vienna, 2019) and many others. At such meetings of dialectologists, the problems of the existence and coexistence of German dialects, the possibility of their preservation, and respect for dialects are discussed, and as a result of the discussions, a lot of scientific terms are born that describe these processes, which largely determine the further development of the science of regional varieties of language.

Conclusion

Even before German dialectology was formed as a science, a subjective attitude towards dialect led to the creation of the first dictionaries of dialectisms, which were created mainly for two reasons: on the one hand, for the educated part of the population, to avoid using these dialectisms in speech; on the other hand, to systematize and classify the dialects in terms of cultural heritage. These works later became the necessary basis for the formation of the science of dialects. In addition, the attitude to the dialect is one of the important extralinguistic factors, the study of which contributed to the formation of many terminological vocabularies, which is proved by the large number of examples we have given. At the same time, the position of the dialectologists themselves, who create and use this vocabulary, also plays an important role. Thus, we state the presence of a certain dependence of scientific knowledge and terminology on subjective opinion, which is predetermined by the very science that a person creates.

References

• Adelung, J. C. (1781). Über die Geschichte der deutschen Sprache, über deutsche Mundarten und deutsche Sprachlehre [About the history of the German language, about German dialects and German language teaching]. Breitkopf.

• Ammon, U. (2006). Die deutschsprachigen Länder. Soziolinguistik: An International Handbook of the Science of the Science of Language and Society (Vol. 3, pp. 1765–1772). Walter de Gruyter.

• Anders, C. A. (2010). Wahrmenungsdialektologie: Das Obersächsische im Alltagsverständnis von Laien [The Upper Saxon in the everyday understanding of laypeople]. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG.

• Bräuer, S. (2015). Bairisch Dialekte in Bayern: Handreichung für den Unterricht [Handout for teaching]. MDV Maristen Druck & Verlag.

• Denkler, M. (2007). Code-switching in Gesprächen münsterländischer Dialektsprecher. Zur Sprachvariation beim konversationellen Erzählen[Code-switching in conversations between dialect speakers from Münsterland. For language variation in conversational storytelling]. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 74, 2/3, 164–195.

• Glück, H. (2016). Kontinuum. Metzler Lexikon Sprache. Stuttgart, Metzler Verlag GmbH.

• Hochholzer, R. (2015). Sprache und Dialekt in Bayern. Grundbegriffe und Entwicklungslinien [Language and dialect in Bavaria. Basic concepts and lines of development]. Dialekte in Bayern: Handreichung für den Unterricht. München, MDV Maristen Druck & Verlag.

• Heynatz, J. F. (1774). Briefe die deutsche Sprache betreffend [Letters concerning the German language]. Mylius.

• Krause, A., & Sternkopf, J. (2000). Zur Akzeptanz von mundartlichen Elementen in Gaststätten-Namen [For the acceptance of dialect elements in restaurant names]. Dialektologie zwischen Tradition und Neuansätzen: Beiträge der internationalen Dialektologentagung (pp. 188-200). Franz Steiner Verlag.

• Merkurieva, V. B. (2004). Dialect and literary language in German-language dramas (relationship of complementarity and isomorphism). Publishing house IGLU.

• Niebaum, H., & Macha, J. (2014). Einführung in die Dialektologie des Deutschen [Introduction to the dialectology of German]. Walter de Gruyter.

• Senina, I. V., & Merkurieva, V. B. (2020). Linguistic terminology in the context of the formation and development of dialectology of the German language. Ikutsk, Publishinghouse ISU.

• Siebenhaar, B. (1996). Das Verhältnis von Mundart und Standardsprache in der deutschsprachigen Schweiz [The relationship between dialect and standard language in German-speaking Switzerland]. http://home.uni-leipzig.de/siebenh/pdf/Siebenhaar_Mda_Std_unv1996.pdf