DOCSLIB.ORG

Germanic Dialects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ABBREVIATIONS . = Cp. compare. fi = 1 er n. fina . Germ . au sla utend , pertaining to a letter t n minati g a word . = ini i al G e m a u e fi s e of . init , r . nl a t nd , r t lett r word = inl m e e m of . Ger . inl au tend , l tt r in iddle word = H . G . High G erman . L . Germ an . = m M . H . G . M iddl e High G er an . = a M d . G . M idl and Germ n . = M M e a e m a . od . H . G . odern or Lit r ry High G r n E = En 0 . O l d gl i l h. = O . F. O l d Fris i an . = O . Ir. 01d Iris h . N = 0 . O l d Norse. = O . S . O l d S axon . = O . Sc . 01d Scandinavi an . = an andi na ian . Sc . or Sc d . Sc v = Skt . Sanskrit . = Sw . Swabian . r-=a e ma efi mea n m e f U G r n pr x, ni g pri itiv , . in st : Urg. m meaning primitive Ger an , W = e ma es t . G . w at Ger nic . ER M AN I DI G O ALECTS . 1 There are different opinion s concerning t he divis ion of - L the Indo Germa nic l angua ges . es kien believes tha t the origina l language from which the sepa ra te "a d o-G ermanic l angua ges are s upposed to h ave s prung firs t divid ed itself into three different dialects or branches : ( 1 ) T he s a c s s o f a s k Z e and A i ti , con i ting S n rit , nd Ar m enian the a e ia e ts of a e s a and me a , nci nt d l c Indi , P r i Ar ni ; 2 the t ea m s G eek 2 e t and ( ) Sou h Europ n , co pri ing r , C l ic a nd 3 the N E ea ai i e m a and Latin ; ( ) orth urop n , cont n ng G r nic - Sl a vo Letti c. 1 Concerning the question of the ori gin and prim itive seat of the - m a ic ace o . ad S r b r l i hu u nd U r Indo G er n r , n O Schr er, p ac ve g e c ng n 1 4 . l a h i i nd geschichte, Je a 883 , p . 4 2 s qq ; a s o C non T ayl or, T e O r g n a " Prim itive S eat of the Ary ans i n The Journal of the Anthropol . In st . d l a d . l . ii 8 . of G r . B ritain an Ire n Vo xxv , London 1 88 . p . 238 sqq 2 h k a e m a h Al a i N ext to t e Gree l ngu ag y be m entioned t e b n an , i T a th e l anguage of anc en t Il l y ria . he true ch aracter of this l angu ge ha s not yet been ful l y ascertained, p hil ol ogists m eeting with great troubl e i n s ep arating p ure Al banian words from those borrowed from ati R m a ce l a ic and T kis l a a es . addi G reek . L n , o n . S von ur h ngu g In tion to thi s the ol dest m onum ents of any extent d ate onl y since the N i a i l s ke seventeenth centu ry . otw thst nd ng . the I l yrians m ust h ave p o n ff i c sid e a l f m a f h G eeks as T ne a l anguage di er ng on r b y ro th t o t e r , h y l ib . 1 cal l s the l l ia s a a ia s . C . G s e e Al did es , , I yr n b rb r n p u tav M y r, e W n 188 - banesische Studi n , ie , 3 84. 4 G er m a ni c Di a l ects . Among these different m emb ers S an skrit i s acknowledged d as unp a ra lleled in a ntiquity a nd dis tinctnes s of s tructure an as bearing the clos es t res embl a nce t o the prehi s toric p aren t 1 s the s peech . It con equently forms for com p ar ative philology na a as s of ea l an tur l b i comparison . For the South Europ n gu ages G reek forms the best connecting link with San skrit ; for the ea a - et e e t i s the North Europ n , Sl vo L tic ; whil C l ic organic link between the North and South E uropea n groups . m a e Joh . Schmidt claim s th at only two dialects firs t d s the f a at their appea ra nce. Thi theory i s s upported by ct th the Indo -G erm a nic la ngu ages of North and South Europe h ave s ome ch aracteris tic features in com m on wit h each ether as a dis tinctive difference from the As i atic group 1 f m ea e e e e e a the ( ) In uni or ity w ith ch oth r , th y ith r r t in “ old a s ound or s how it in its weaken ed form as e or z , while Old Indi an and Old Pers i an a s a rule retain in the s a me ases the a a a nd s the eake of a c origin l , how w nin g kt . and Z e to i only in a very limited m ea s ure. S nd ’ d a s a n G r d éu a Lat . d ecem e . d e . t . d esz zm t G . , . , , C lt g , Li h , oth ' ta i hu n . G . teha n G e m . z ehn E n . ten Skt. m a tr e , O H , r , g ; , L m a er m a er m a tha i r G r . at, t , Sl avonic t , Celt. , m er 0 . H . G . u ot . ( 2) T hey s how s om e uniform ity in ch anging origin al r i nto l which l a tter letter i s not a m ember of the origin a l “ ” ' - m l k r olca s kev u o Indo G er anic a ph abet. S t . light , G r . s, w hi te La t . tu m tu c is . l oche t . Za u ka s B l u ca , , , O Ir , Li h , O . ulg. ; ” “ - - xké m La cl u o . c l r Skt . cm ea G r . t . O . ea G . , to h r , , , Ir , oth ” - - - - - “ hl o s e m a kl a u s a n a . , Sl v . , I he r 3 ) They u s e in common s om e prepos itions in a m ea ning a ltogether different from wh a t the s am e words i n S an s krit ’ ' e : G r a n Lat a m b indicat but . w , . G . ‘ mbz . u , Celt 4 T e al l a e a v a a s m a ea t e ( ) h y h v oc bul ry, i il r to ch o h r, in terms relating to a higher state of agriculture which is w ant ing in S an skrit. ( 5) T he common n ame for s alt of the E uropean groups ‘ s om e es ects G eek Lati and e e ial l In r p r , n , s p c y Lithuani an show m o e a c aic for m s t a e v en a r r h h n S nskrit, yet Speaking in 8. general way the above statement is correct. Ger m a ni c Di a l ects . 5 es a ea the a an do not pp r in Old Indi n d Pers ia n l angu ages . “ ” ( 6) T he ao -ca lled G erm a n La u tvers chiebung i s in s m e s not ed the s a t s m of k o word condition by con on n i S an s rit , “ ” b u t by th a t of the other E uropean l anguages : the It of Low “ ” ' ' G e m a c i s e e f m the m e a e o e ao r n d riv d ro di ( g . y ) b ut not fr m t he a s a a of the a sk t a ha m o pir t S n ri ( ) . From this i t s eem s prob able th a t the Indo -G erma nic fam il y - of l a ngu a ges s plit origin ally into two di alects which m ay be am ed a f e t e at e om e the s a and n t r h ir l r h , A i tic European ; a nd th a t t he com m on fa m ily s epa r a ted before its people had entered the ao -c a l led s econd s t ate o f c iviliz ation ; but t h a t the m em e s of t he E ea a w e l w b r urop n br nch re s til united , hen they a e the m a c fe for at o f a l t e and ch ng d no di li th gricu ur , when e f s a t s m e f m t e a E th y ound l in o or on h ir w y to urope.
Recommended publications
  • Handout 1: the History of the English Language 1. Proto-Indo-European

    Handout 1: the History of the English Language 1. Proto-Indo-European

    Handout 1: The history of the English language Cold climate: they had a word for snow: *sneigwh- (cf. Latin nix, Greek Seminar English Historical Linguistics and Dialectology, Andrew McIntyre niphos, Gothic snaiws, Gaelic sneachta). Words for beech, birch, elm, ash, oak, apple, cherry; bee, bear, beaver, eagle. 1. Proto-Indo-European (roughly 3500-2500 BC) Original location is also deduced from subsequent spread of IE languages. Bronze age technology. They had gold, silver, copper, but not iron. 1.1. Proto-Indo-European and linguistic reconstruction They rode horses and had domesticated sheep, cattle. Cattle a sign of wealth (cf. Most languages in Europe, and others in areas stretching as far as India, are called Indo- fee/German Vieh ‘cattle’, Latin pecunia ‘money’/pecus ‘cattle’) European languages, as they descend from a language called Proto-Indo-European Agriculture: cultivated cereals *gre-no- (>grain, corn), also grinding of corn (PIE). Here ‘proto’ means that there are no surviving texts in the language and thus that *mela- (cf. mill, meal); they also seem to have had ploughs and yokes. linguists reconstructed the language by comparing similarities and systematic differences Wheels and wagons (wheel < kw(e)-kwlo < kwel ‘go around’) between the languages descended from it. Religion: priests, polytheistic with sun worship *deiw-os ‘shine’ cf. Lat. deus, Gk. The table below gives examples of historically related words in different languages which Zeus, Sanskrit deva. Patriarchal, cf. Zeus pater, Iupiter, Sanskr. dyaus pitar. show either similarities in pronunciation, or systematic differences. Example: most IE Trade/exchange:*do- yields Lat. donare ‘give’ and a Hittite word meaning ‘take’, languages have /p/ in the first two lines, suggesting that PIE originally had /p/ in these *nem- > German nehmen ‘take’ but in Gk.
  • Resettlement Into Roman Territory Across the Rhine and the Danube Under the Early Empire (To the Marcomannic Wars)*

    Resettlement Into Roman Territory Across the Rhine and the Danube Under the Early Empire (To the Marcomannic Wars)*

    Eos C 2013 / fasciculus extra ordinem editus electronicus ISSN 0012-7825 RESETTLEMENT INTO ROMAN TERRITORY ACROSS THE RHINE AND THE DANUBE UNDER THE EARLY EMPIRE (TO THE MARCOMANNIC WARS)* By LESZEK MROZEWICZ The purpose of this paper is to investigate the resettling of tribes from across the Rhine and the Danube onto their Roman side as part of the Roman limes policy, an important factor making the frontier easier to defend and one way of treating the population settled in the vicinity of the Empire’s borders. The temporal framework set in the title follows from both the state of preser- vation of sources attesting resettling operations as regards the first two hundred years of the Empire, the turn of the eras and the time of the Marcomannic Wars, and from the stark difference in the nature of those resettlements between the times of the Julio-Claudian emperors on the one hand, and of Marcus Aurelius on the other. Such, too, is the thesis of the article: that the resettlements of the period of the Marcomannic Wars were a sign heralding the resettlements that would come in late antiquity1, forced by peoples pressing against the river line, and eventu- ally taking place completely out of Rome’s control. Under the Julio-Claudian dynasty, on the other hand, the Romans were in total control of the situation and transferring whole tribes into the territory of the Empire was symptomatic of their active border policies. There is one more reason to list, compare and analyse Roman resettlement operations: for the early Empire period, the literature on the subject is very much dominated by studies into individual tribe transfers, and works whose range en- * Originally published in Polish in “Eos” LXXV 1987, fasc.
  • Language Contact at the Romance-Germanic Language Border

    Language Contact at the Romance-Germanic Language Border

    Language Contact at the Romance–Germanic Language Border Other Books of Interest from Multilingual Matters Beyond Bilingualism: Multilingualism and Multilingual Education Jasone Cenoz and Fred Genesee (eds) Beyond Boundaries: Language and Identity in Contemporary Europe Paul Gubbins and Mike Holt (eds) Bilingualism: Beyond Basic Principles Jean-Marc Dewaele, Alex Housen and Li wei (eds) Can Threatened Languages be Saved? Joshua Fishman (ed.) Chtimi: The Urban Vernaculars of Northern France Timothy Pooley Community and Communication Sue Wright A Dynamic Model of Multilingualism Philip Herdina and Ulrike Jessner Encyclopedia of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism Colin Baker and Sylvia Prys Jones Identity, Insecurity and Image: France and Language Dennis Ager Language, Culture and Communication in Contemporary Europe Charlotte Hoffman (ed.) Language and Society in a Changing Italy Arturo Tosi Language Planning in Malawi, Mozambique and the Philippines Robert B. Kaplan and Richard B. Baldauf, Jr. (eds) Language Planning in Nepal, Taiwan and Sweden Richard B. Baldauf, Jr. and Robert B. Kaplan (eds) Language Planning: From Practice to Theory Robert B. Kaplan and Richard B. Baldauf, Jr. (eds) Language Reclamation Hubisi Nwenmely Linguistic Minorities in Central and Eastern Europe Christina Bratt Paulston and Donald Peckham (eds) Motivation in Language Planning and Language Policy Dennis Ager Multilingualism in Spain M. Teresa Turell (ed.) The Other Languages of Europe Guus Extra and Durk Gorter (eds) A Reader in French Sociolinguistics Malcolm Offord (ed.) Please contact us for the latest book information: Multilingual Matters, Frankfurt Lodge, Clevedon Hall, Victoria Road, Clevedon, BS21 7HH, England http://www.multilingual-matters.com Language Contact at the Romance–Germanic Language Border Edited by Jeanine Treffers-Daller and Roland Willemyns MULTILINGUAL MATTERS LTD Clevedon • Buffalo • Toronto • Sydney Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Language Contact at Romance-Germanic Language Border/Edited by Jeanine Treffers-Daller and Roland Willemyns.
  • The Shared Lexicon of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic

    The Shared Lexicon of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic

    THE SHARED LEXICON OF BALTIC, SLAVIC AND GERMANIC VINCENT F. VAN DER HEIJDEN ******** Thesis for the Master Comparative Indo-European Linguistics under supervision of prof.dr. A.M. Lubotsky Universiteit Leiden, 2018 Table of contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Background topics 3 2.1. Non-lexical similarities between Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 3 2.2. The Prehistory of Balto-Slavic and Germanic 3 2.2.1. Northwestern Indo-European 3 2.2.2. The Origins of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 4 2.3. Possible substrates in Balto-Slavic and Germanic 6 2.3.1. Hunter-gatherer languages 6 2.3.2. Neolithic languages 7 2.3.3. The Corded Ware culture 7 2.3.4. Temematic 7 2.3.5. Uralic 9 2.4. Recapitulation 9 3. The shared lexicon of Baltic, Slavic and Germanic 11 3.1. Forms that belong to the shared lexicon 11 3.1.1. Baltic-Slavic-Germanic forms 11 3.1.2. Baltic-Germanic forms 19 3.1.3. Slavic-Germanic forms 24 3.2. Forms that do not belong to the shared lexicon 27 3.2.1. Indo-European forms 27 3.2.2. Forms restricted to Europe 32 3.2.3. Possible Germanic borrowings into Baltic and Slavic 40 3.2.4. Uncertain forms and invalid comparisons 42 4. Analysis 48 4.1. Morphology of the forms 49 4.2. Semantics of the forms 49 4.2.1. Natural terms 49 4.2.2. Cultural terms 50 4.3. Origin of the forms 52 5. Conclusion 54 Abbreviations 56 Bibliography 57 1 1.
  • Bullard Eva 2013 MA.Pdf

    Bullard Eva 2013 MA.Pdf

    Marcomannia in the making. by Eva Bullard BA, University of Victoria, 2008 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Greek and Roman Studies Eva Bullard 2013 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee Marcomannia in the making by Eva Bullard BA, University of Victoria, 2008 Supervisory Committee Dr. John P. Oleson, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Supervisor Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Departmental Member iii Abstract Supervisory Committee John P. Oleson, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Supervisor Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, Department of Greek and Roman Studies Departmental Member During the last stages of the Marcommani Wars in the late second century A.D., Roman literary sources recorded that the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius was planning to annex the Germanic territory of the Marcomannic and Quadic tribes. This work will propose that Marcus Aurelius was going to create a province called Marcomannia. The thesis will be supported by archaeological data originating from excavations in the Roman installation at Mušov, Moravia, Czech Republic. The investigation will examine the history of the non-Roman region beyond the northern Danubian frontier, the character of Roman occupation and creation of other Roman provinces on the Danube, and consult primary sources and modern research on the topic of Roman expansion and empire building during the principate. iv Table of Contents Supervisory Committee .....................................................................................................
  • Harmony of Babel Harmony of Babel Profiles of Famous Polyglots of Europe

    Harmony of Babel Harmony of Babel Profiles of Famous Polyglots of Europe

    In the late 1980s the distinguished interpreter Kató Lomb researched historical and contemporary lomb polyglots in an effort to understand their linguistic feats. Among her fellow polyglots she asked: “When can we say we know a language?” “Which is the most important language skill: grammar, vocabulary, or good pronunciation?” harmony “What method did you use to learn languages?” “Has it ever happened to you that you started learning a language, but could not cope with it?” of “What connection do you see between age and babel language learning?” “Are there ‘easy’ and ‘difficult,’ ‘rich’ and ‘poor,’ ‘beautiful’ and ‘less beautiful’ languages?” :Europe Polyglots of Famous of Profiles “What is multilingualism good for?” The answers Lomb collected from her interlocutors are singular and often profound. Grounded in real-world experience, they will be of interest to linguaphiles who are seeking to supplement their theoretical knowledge of language learning. kató lomb (1909–2003) was called “possibly HARMONY the most accomplished polyglot in the world” by linguist Stephen Krashen. One of the pioneers of simultaneous interpreting, Lomb worked in 16 languages in her native Hungary and abroad. She wrote several books on language and language of BABEL learning in the 1970s and 1980s. Profiles of Famous Polyglots of Europe http://tesl-ej.org KATÓ LOMB berkeley · kyoto HARMONY of BABEL HARMONY of BABEL profiles of famous polyglots of europe KATÓ LOMB Translated from the Hungarian by Ádám Szegi Edited by Scott Alkire tesl-ej Publications Berkeley, California & Kyoto, Japan Originally published in Hungary as Bábeli harmónia (Interjúk Európa híres soknyelvű embereivel) by Gondolat, Budapest, in 1988.
  • Germanic Languages an Overview

    Germanic Languages an Overview

    Cambridge University Press 978-1-108-42186-7 — The Cambridge Handbook of Germanic Linguistics Edited by Michael T. Putnam , B. Richard Page Excerpt More Information Germanic Languages An Overview B. Richard Page and Michael T. Putnam I.1 Introduction The Germanic languages include some of the world’s most widely spoken and thoroughly researched languages. English has become a global lan- guage that serves as a lingua franca in many parts of the world and has an estimated 1.12 billon speakers (Simons and Fennig 2018). German, Dutch, Icelandic, Swedish, and Norwegian have also been studied and described extensively from both diachronic and synchronic perspectives. In addition to the standard varieties of these languages, there are available descrip- tions of many nonstandard varieties as well as of regional and minority languages, such as Frisian and Low German. There are several possibilities to consider when putting together a handbook of a language family. One would be to have a chapter devoted to each language, as in Ko¨nig and Auwera (1993). This would require the choice of which languages to include and would make cross-linguistic comparisons difficult. In the alternative, one could take a thematic, comparative approach and exam- ine different aspects of the Germanic languages, such as morphology or syntax, as in Harbert (2007). We have chosen the latter approach for this handbook. The advantage of such an approach is that it gives the contri- butors in the volume an opportunity to compare and contrast the broad range of empirical phenomena found across the Germanic languages that have been documented in the literature.
  • CHAPTER SEVENTEEN History of the German Language 1 Indo

    CHAPTER SEVENTEEN History of the German Language 1 Indo

    CHAPTER SEVENTEEN History of the German Language 1 Indo-European and Germanic Background Indo-European Background It has already been mentioned in this course that German and English are related languages. Two languages can be related to each other in much the same way that two people can be related to each other. If two people share a common ancestor, say their mother or their great-grandfather, then they are genetically related. Similarly, German and English are genetically related because they share a common ancestor, a language which was spoken in what is now northern Germany sometime before the Angles and the Saxons migrated to England. We do not have written records of this language, unfortunately, but we have a good idea of what it must have looked and sounded like. We have arrived at our conclusions as to what it looked and sounded like by comparing the sounds of words and morphemes in earlier written stages of English and German (and Dutch) and in modern-day English and German dialects. As a result of the comparisons we are able to reconstruct what the original language, called a proto-language, must have been like. This particular proto-language is usually referred to as Proto-West Germanic. The method of reconstruction based on comparison is called the comparative method. If faced with two languages the comparative method can tell us one of three things: 1) the two languages are related in that both are descended from a common ancestor, e.g. German and English, 2) the two are related in that one is the ancestor of the other, e.g.
  • Putting Frisian Names on the Map

    Putting Frisian Names on the Map

    GEGN.2/2021/68/CRP.68 15 March 2021 English United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names Second session New York, 3 – 7 May 2021 Item 12 of the provisional agenda * Geographical names as culture, heritage and identity, including indigenous, minority and regional languages and multilingual issues Putting Frisian names on the map Submitted by the Netherlands** * GEGN.2/2021/1 ** Prepared by Jasper Hogerwerf, Kadaster GEGN.2/2021/68/CRP.68 Introduction Dutch is the national language of the Netherlands. It has official status throughout the Kingdom of the Netherlands. In addition, there are several other recognized languages. Papiamentu (or Papiamento) and English are formally used in the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom, while Low-Saxon and Limburgish are recognized as non-standardized regional languages, and Yiddish and Sinte Romani as non-territorial minority languages in the European part of the Kingdom. The Dutch Sign Language is formally recognized as well. The largest minority language is (West) Frisian or Frysk, an official language in the province of Friesland (Fryslân). Frisian is a West Germanic language closely related to the Saterland Frisian and North Frisian languages spoken in Germany. The Frisian languages as a group are closer related to English than to Dutch or German. Frisian is spoken as a mother tongue by about 55% of the population in the province of Friesland, which translates to some 350,000 native speakers. In many rural areas a large majority speaks Frisian, while most cities have a Dutch-speaking majority. A standardized Frisian orthography was established in 1879 and reformed in 1945, 1980 and 2015.
  • Among All Kinds of German Language Still Spoken, Cimbrian Is

    Among All Kinds of German Language Still Spoken, Cimbrian Is

    A Shakespearean Sonnet in Cimbrian – or Perpetuating the Old Mystery by Remigius Geiser Among all kinds of German languages still spoken, Cimbrian1 is undoubtedly the oldest one. Its origin is lost in the mystery of history. Some think it derives from Bavarians and Tyroli- ans, who settled in Northern Italy during the 11th and/or 12th century. Others derive it from the last remainder of the Langobards, who spoke a language very similar to medieval Bavarian or Tyrolian. There are also scolars connecting it to the last Goths … Cimbrian is nowadays still spoken by a few hundred people – nobody has counted their exact number so far – all of them Italian citizens nowadays in three provinces of Northern Italy: Vicenza, Verona and Trentino. They all speak Italian as well, and two hundred years ago Cimbrian was already said to be dying out before the beginning of the 20th century, but has now reached the third millennium. There are still three communities speaking Cimbrian today. The one we are dealing with in particular is the so-called “Sette Comuni”, the "Siban Komàüne" on the Plateau of Asiago, the Altopiano di Asiago, which is situated between Vicenza and Trent in the province Vicenza. In contrast to all other Cimbrian communities, they were a politically autonomous Alpine rural republic, comparable to Switzerland, from about 1200 AD until the times of Napoleon. Such a status of considerable political independence enabled the Sette Comuni to develop their vari- ant of Old High German into a standard literary language that was applied to various func- tions, especially religion and literature.
  • A Penn-Style Treebank of Middle Low German

    A Penn-Style Treebank of Middle Low German

    A Penn-style Treebank of Middle Low German Hannah Booth Joint work with Anne Breitbarth, Aaron Ecay & Melissa Farasyn Ghent University 12th December, 2019 1 / 47 Context I Diachronic parsed corpora now exist for a range of languages: I English (Taylor et al., 2003; Kroch & Taylor, 2000) I Icelandic (Wallenberg et al., 2011) I French (Martineau et al., 2010) I Portuguese (Galves et al., 2017) I Irish (Lash, 2014) I Have greatly enhanced our understanding of syntactic change: I Quantitative studies of syntactic phenomena over time I Findings which have a strong empirical basis and are (somewhat) reproducible 2 / 47 Context I Corpus of Historical Low German (‘CHLG’) I Anne Breitbarth (Gent) I Sheila Watts (Cambridge) I George Walkden (Konstanz) I Parsed corpus spanning: I Old Low German/Old Saxon (c.800-1050) I Middle Low German (c.1250-1600) I OLG component already available: HeliPaD (Walkden, 2016) I 46,067 words I Heliand text I MLG component currently under development 3 / 47 What is Middle Low German? I MLG = West Germanic scribal dialects in Northern Germany and North-Eastern Netherlands 4 / 47 What is Middle Low German? I The rise and fall of (written) Low German I Pre-800: pre-historical I c.800-1050: Old Low German/Old Saxon I c.1050-1250 Attestation gap (Latin) I c.1250-1370: Early MLG I c.1370-1520: ‘Classical MLG’ (Golden Age) I c.1520-1850: transition to HG as in written domain I c.1850-today: transition to HG in spoken domain 5 / 47 What is Middle Low German? I Hanseatic League: alliance between North German towns and trade outposts abroad to promote economic and diplomatic interests (13th-15th centuries) 6 / 47 What is Middle Low German? I LG served as lingua franca for supraregional communication I High prestige across North Sea and Baltic regions I Associated with trade and economic prosperity I Linguistic legacy I Huge amounts of linguistic borrowings in e.g.
  • "Ich Höre Gern Diesen Dialekt, Erinnert Mich an Meine Urlaube in Kärnten

    "Ich Höre Gern Diesen Dialekt, Erinnert Mich an Meine Urlaube in Kärnten

    "Ich höre gern diesen Dialekt, erinnert mich an meine Urlaube in Kärnten ... ": A survey of the usage and the popularity of Austrian dialects in Vienna John Bellamy (Manchester) A survey of over 200 Austrians was undertaken in Vienna to investigate the extent to which they say they use dialect. They were asked if they speak dialect and if they do, in which situations they would switch to using predominantly Hochsprache. The responses have been analysed according to age, gender, birthplace (in Austria) and occupation to find out if the data reveals underlying correlations, especially to see if there have been any developments of note since earlier studies (for example, Steinegger 1995). The same group of informants were also asked about their opinions of Austrian dialects in general and this paper details their answers along with the reasons behind their positive or negative responses in this regard. The data collected during this survey will be compared to other contemporary investigations (particularly Soukup 2009) in an effort to obtain a broader view of dialect usage and attitudes towards dialect in Vienna and its environs. Since a very similar study was undertaken at the same time in the UK (Manchester) with more or less the same questions, the opportunity presents itself to compare dialect usage in the area in and around Vienna with regional accents and usage in the urban area of Manchester. References will be made during the course of the presentation to both sets of data. Language planning in Europe during the long 19th century: The selection of the standard language in Norway and Flanders Els Belsack (VU Brussel) The long 19th century (1794-1914) is considered to be the century of language planning par excellence.