The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Department of Germanic and Slavic Languages & Literatures THE IMPACT OF SOCIETAL CHANGES AND ATTITUDES ON THE MAINTENANCE AND SHIFT OF PENNSYLVANIA GERMAN AMONG THE OLD ORDER AMISH IN LANCASTER COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA A Dissertation in German by Marie Y. Qvarnström © 2015 Marie Y. Qvarnström Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2015 The dissertation of Marie Y. Qvarnström was reviewed and approved * by the following: B. Richard Page Associate Professor of German and Linguistics Head of the Department of Germanic & Slavic Languages & Literatures Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee Carrie N. Jackson Associate Professor of German and Linguistics Michael T. Putnam Associate Professor of German and Linguistics John M. Lipski Edwin Erle Sparks Professor of Spanish & Linguistics *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School. ii ABSTRACT Most literature on the maintenance and shift of Pennsylvania German among the Old Order Amish (hereafter often referred to as PG and OOA) suggests that PG among this conservative group of Amish will in the future still be maintained much as it has in the past. Some scholars, however, argue that a shift to English is possible in the future. The researcher of this this study proposes that too little attention has been paid to the societal changes that may influence the PG spoken by the OOA in Lancaster County and suggests that the linguistic situation is not so stable as has generally been assumed. For that reason, this sociolinguistic study was aimed at exploring language use and attitudes among the OOA in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. The purpose of the study was to analyze the language use in community and home, to gain insight and understanding about attitudes of the community members toward their heritage language and culture, and to attempt an assessment of the degree to which the language use and attitudes indicate heritage language maintenance or shift. It was also to propose possible positive actions to ensure the maintenance of the PG language. Drawing from questionnaires, interviews, participant observation, and analyses of actual conversations, the researcher concludes that English is spoken much more frequently than before, especially among the young people working off-farm employment. As a result, an increased usage of English in the home can be detected although PG is still the preferred language. A number of factors contribute to the maintenance of PG. PG is still used extensively in intra- communication between Amish in the community and also in the workplace with Amish workmates. The Amish find it important to speak both PG and English. PG is thus still passed on to younger generations. PG serves a significant ceremonial function with respect to community worship. iii Furthermore, community members, both young and old, express mostly positive attitudes and loyalty toward the heritage language and culture. Despite strong maintenance, the seeds of language shift were observed as well. Elements likely to promote languages shift included increased off-farm work and more intense customer contacts, singings, youth-group meetings, and “rumspringa.” Some negative attitudes were also expressed about PG constantly including an ever greater number of English words and expressions to an extent that in the end it will not be PG anymore. The question of identity then arose along with the issue of what will happen to the Amish as a separate people. To secure language maintenance, different measures need to be taken, especially to protect the home domain from the encroaching English language and to ensure that the OOA, especially the young, continue to regard PG in a positive light and thus wish to speak it also in the future. KEY WORDS: PENNSYLVANIA GERMAN/LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE/ SHIFT/ ATTITUDE/SOCIOECONOMIC AND SOCIOCULTURAL CHANGES / LANCASTER COUNTY iv TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ix LIST OF TABLES xi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS xiii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Catalyst for the Study 1 1.2 Problem Statement 3 1.3 Purpose of the Study 4 1.4 Incentive for the Study 4 1.5 Organization of the Dissertation 7 2. THE PENNSYLVANIA GERMANS AND THEIR LANGUAGE 11 2.1 Historical Background 11 2.2 The Pennsylvania Germans 13 2.3 Scholarly Treatment of the Pennsylvania German Language – An Overview 15 2.3.1 Early Records of Pennsylvania German Speakers 20 2.3.2 Pennsylvania German Linguistics, 1870-1900 21 2.3.3 Pennsylvania German Linguistics, 1930-40 24 2.3.4 A New Focus: Pennsylvania German Linguistics, 1980 to the present 28 3. LANGUAGE MAINTENANCE AND SHIFT IN VARIOUS PENNSYLVANIA GERMAN COMMUNITIES 32 3.1 Introduction 32 3.2 Pennsylvania Germans Speakers: Different Pieces to the Same Puzzle 34 3.3 Nonsectarian Communities 36 3.3.1 Language Shift in Nonsectarian Communities 36 3.3.2 Level of Pennsylvania German Proficiency among Nonsectarians 38 3.3.3 Cultural Assimilation Encouraging Language Shift 39 3.4 Various Means of Language Preservation 44 3.4.1 Dialect Class 44 3.4.2 The Fersommling 45 3.5 The Intricate Web of Sectarian Communities 47 3.5.1 Traditional Groups 47 3.5.1.1 Old Order Mennonites 48 v 3.5.1.2 The Beginnings of the Weaverland Conference Mennonites 49 3.5.1.3 A Split Church 49 3.5.1.4 Present-day Weaverland Conference “Horning” Mennonites 50 3.5.1.5 Pennsylvania German of the “Horning” Mennonites: Unstable Bilingualism 51 3.5.1.6 The Groffdale Conference “Wenger” Mennonites 51 3.5.1.7 The Struggle Between Language Repertoires in the “Wenger” Community 52 3.5.1.8 Less Conservative but Still Amish: The New Order Amish 53 3.5.1.9 The New Order Amish: Linguistically Conservative 54 3.6 Transitional Groups 54 3.6.1 The Beachy Amish 55 3.7 Transformational Groups 56 3.8 The Current Linguistic Situation in OOA Communities 57 3.8.1 Amish High German 57 3.8.2 Bilingualism in the Old Order Amish Community 60 3.8.3 Other Language-use Factors in the Maintenance Efforts of a Language 66 3.8.3.1 Code-switching 66 3.8.3.2 Borrowing 67 3.8.3.3 Linguistic Convergence as a Factor of Language Maintenance 68 3.8.4 Faith: A Major Contributing Factor to the Maintenance of PG 70 3.9 Language Attitudes 74 3.10 Language Maintenance or Language Shift among the Old Order Amish? 78 4. RESEARCH DESIGN 81 4.1 Introduction 81 4.2 Research Questions 82 4.3 Instrumentation 83 4.4 Informants and Their Distribution 85 5. A SHIFT IN OCCUPATIONS: THE AMISH AS EXTRAORDINARY ENTREPRENEURS 93 5.1 Changing Demographics 94 5.2 Alternatives to Working on the Farm 96 5.2.1 A Novel Model of Amish Enterprise 99 5.3. Tourism as a Catalyst to Amish Entrepreneurship 102 5.3.1 The Dawn of Tourism in Lancaster County 103 5.3.2 Amish Pseudo-Enterprises in Lancaster County: Blessing or Curse? 103 5.3.3 Authenticity: A Winning Concept for Amish Enterprises 105 5.4 The Negative Effects of Tourism on Pennsylvania German 107 vi 6 THE CONCEPT OF SOCIAL NETWORKS AS A THEORETICAL CONSTRUCT 109 6.1 The Advent of the Social Network Structure 110 6.2 Tight-knit, High-density Network 113 6.2.1 The Tight-knit Network as an Instrument of Language Maintenance 114 6.3 The Open, Low-density Network 114 6.4 Previous Sociolinguistic Studies Utilizing the Social Network Structure 115 6.5 The Amish Community as a Social Network Construct 117 7 LINGUISTIC DATA AND DISCUSSION 124 7.1 Current Demographic Data for the Old Order Amish in Lancaster County 124 7.2 Workplace Demographics and Language Contact 132 7.3 Language-contact Situations outside the Workplace 137 7.4 English Influence on Pennsylvania German Spoken in the Home 146 7.5 Is Language Use in Amish Schools in a State of Flux? 149 7.6 Young People’s Perception of PG, Seen through the Eyes of the Old Folk 156 7.7 Code-switching among the OOA 161 7.8 Pennsylvania German or English – What Is the Their Own Preference? 166 7.9 The Advantages of Knowing Pennsylvania German 170 7.10 Is There More to Speaking PG Than Just Inheriting the Mother Tongue? 174 7.11 The Symbolic Value of Ethnic Markers on Modern-day Old Order Amish 178 7.12 The Survival Chances of Present-day Pennsylvania German 182 7.13 Too Much English Spoken in the Community 186 7.14 Is a Monolingual English-speaking OOA Community in the Future? 194 8 CONCLUSION 203 8.1 Introduction 203 8.2 Linguistic Change in the Nonsectarian Community 204 8.3 Present-day Old Order Amish Work Related Demographics 205 8.4 Increased Use of English in the Community Not Only a Work and Age Related Phenomenon 207 8.5 The Linguistic Situation in the Home Domain 209 8.5.1 Intergenerational Transfer 211 8.6 The School’s Role in the Shifting Linguistic Landscape 212 8.7 A Positive Attitude: A Major Element in Maintenance Efforts for PG 213 8.8 The Future of Pennsylvania German among the OOA in Lancaster County 214 8.8.1 Possible Actions to be Taken in the Maintenance Efforts of Pennsylvania German 215 8.9 Directions for Future Research 216 8.10 A Final Analysis: Elements That Will Encourage the Maintenance of PG in 219 the Future vii APPENDIX A – INFORMANT DEMOGRAPHICS 225 APPENDIX B – LETTER OF INTRODUCTION 227 APPENDIX C – QUESTIONNAIRE 1 – ORIGINIAL QUESTIONS 228 APPENDIX D – QUESTIONNAIRE 2 – ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS 234 BIBLIOGRAPHY 235 viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3-1. Selected branches in Lancaster County by level of assimilation (adapted from Kraybill and Hostetter 2001) 47 Figure 4-1.