Front Matter Template
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Copyright by Katrin Fuchs 2017 The Dissertation Committee for Katrin Fuchs certifies that this is the approved version of the following dissertation: Language History as a History of Diversity: A study of language history from below of Early New High German Committee: Marc Pierce, Supervisor Hans Boas Peter Hess Mary Blockley Lars Hinrichs Language History as a History of Diversity: A study of language history from below of Early New High German by Katrin Fuchs Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Texas at Austin December 2017 Dedication For Steven and Lotte Acknowledgements I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my committee chair and Doktorvater Marc Pierce. His guidance throughout the past four years, his extensive and direct feedback, and his academic and moral support made this dissertation possible. Special thanks also to Hans Boas and Cori Crane, whose advice and encouragement during the entire process was invaluable. Furthermore, I want to thank the members of my dissertation committee for their insightful and constructive comments and suggestions. My heartfelt appreciation goes also to the The Department of Germanic Studies at UT Austin for the generous financial and moral support, and particularly to Maria Pineda and Monica Urso for their help and dedicated work. I also want to thank my fellow graduate students for being sounding boards, motivational speakers, proof readers, errand runners, and friends. It was an honor to be part of this group. Finally, I am deeply grateful for my wonderful family and friends, both in Germany and Texas. Without the continuous support of particularly my very patient and understanding husband, my parents and parents-in-law, my grandmother, Christian, Sabrina, and Linda, this dissertation would have not been finished. Danke, y’all! v Language History as a History of Diversity Katrin Fuchs, PhD The University of Texas at Austin, 2017 Supervisor: Marc Pierce This dissertation analyses the accuracy of the orthographic descriptions found in traditional Early New High German grammars. The analysis is based in the assumption that these language overviews have too narrow a focus in their data selection, as they rely solely on upper class and literary documents. The question of whether a comparison of the feature descriptions in these grammars with a corpus of a non-traditional genre written by people from other social classes may yield different results is posed. Furthermore, it is asked what potential reasons might exist for this narrow selection of data. The general discussion follows the research frame of “language history from below” (Elspaß 2005), which aims to include material from other genres, social classes, and women to draw a more accurate and dynamic picture of language history. The present study is based on a corpus of witch hunt interrogation records (Hexenverhörprotokolle, Macha et al. 2005), which were written by scribes of intermediate social status. The records stem from West Middle German and West South German regions and were created between 1580 and 1660. This time frame largely overlaps with the presumed end phase of an internal standardization process of the German written language, which is also the focus of this dissertation in order to make a direct comparison possible. vi Six orthographic features that are well-documented and should show a strong tendency towards standardization within the time frame were investigated. These investigations revealed that certain deviations between the feature discussions in the Early New High German grammars and the results of this dissertation exist. However, the too narrowly focused data selection of these grammars was not the only factor contributing to these deviations. Other possible explanations are a general reluctance to discuss idiolectal variation and orthographic variation not based on sound change. These could exist due to a long-standing focus on national and spoken language. In general, it was shown that it is important to include more diverse data in the investigation of language history in order to incorporate the entirety of language use across all social classes. vii Table of Contents List of Tables ........................................................................................................ xii List of Figures ...................................................................................................... xiii Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................1 1.1. Project Overview ...................................................................................1 1.2. Relevance of the Study ..........................................................................6 1.3. Outline of the Dissertation .....................................................................7 Chapter 2: Literature Review ...................................................................................9 2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................9 2.2. Language History as a Discipline ..........................................................9 2.2.1. A History of Language History............................................9 2.2.2. Problems ............................................................................14 2.2.3. New Developments ............................................................15 2.3. Historical Sociolinguistics ...................................................................17 2.3.1. The Field ............................................................................17 2.3.2. Methods..............................................................................21 2.3.3. New Developments ............................................................24 2.4. Traditional Views of Early New High German ...................................25 2.4.1. Temporal Distinction .........................................................25 2.4.2. Dialectal Landscape ...........................................................27 2.5. Traditional Views of Standardization ..................................................31 2.5.1. What is Standardization? ...................................................31 2.5.2. German Standardization.....................................................32 2.5.3. Newer Insights: The Influence of Language Prestige ........40 2.6. The Issue: A Question of Focus ...........................................................42 2.7. Previous Works on the Corpus ............................................................46 2.8. Conclusion ...........................................................................................48 Chapter 3: Socio-Historical Background ...............................................................49 3.1. Introduction ..........................................................................................49 viii 3.2. Germany in the 16th and 17th Centuries .............................................50 3.2.1. Society in Early Modern Germany ....................................52 3.2.2. The Reformation and Its Aftermath ...................................54 3.3. The European Witch Hunt ...................................................................56 3.3.1. Witch Hunt as a Mass Phenomenon ..................................58 3.3.2. Social Catalysts ..................................................................61 3.4. Writing in Early Modern Germany ......................................................63 3.4.1. Literacy and Genre .............................................................63 3.4.2. Language Ideology: Grammarians, Language Societies, and Purism .........................................................................................65 3.4.3. Linguistic Reality: Dialects, Sociolects .............................67 3.5. Court Records as a Genre ....................................................................68 3.5.1. Genre Description ..............................................................68 3.5.2. Witch hunt records as a sub-genre .....................................70 3.6. Conclusion ...........................................................................................73 Chapter 4: Methodology ........................................................................................75 4.1. Corpus (Methodological Considerations) ............................................75 4.1.1. ENHG Orthographic Usage ...............................................78 4.1.2. Legal Texts and Court Records..........................................81 4.1.3. Origin of the Records .........................................................82 4.1.4. Spoken vs. Written Language ............................................83 4.2. General Methodology ..........................................................................86 4.2.1. Consensus in Grammars ....................................................87 4.2.2. Choice of Corpus and Features ..........................................88 4.2.3. General Methodological Steps ...........................................90 4.3. Overview of Features ...........................................................................94 4.4. Conclusion ...........................................................................................96 Chapter 5: Data Analysis .......................................................................................97