Band 49, Heft 1

This paper deals with the variation of adjective inflection in nominal phrases with two consecutive adjectives in the dative singular masculine/neuter (e. g. mit größerem politische m [strong inflection] Einfluss vs. mit größerem politische n [weak inflection] Einfluss ‚with greater political influence‘). Only the second adjective is affected by the variation; it can show strong or weak inflection (parallel inflection vs. alternating inflection). In Standard German, both uses coexist without any difference in meaning or function. This phenomenon is analyzed using corpus data. The focus is on the question why this variation persists almost exclusively in the dative singular masculine/neuter. After the discussion of different explanations available, a phonological approach to explain the persistence of the variation is presented. It is argued that the low phonological contrast between the strong inflection - m and its weak counterpart - n is the reason why the variation is still persistent in the dative singular masculine/neuter. The role of grammar reference works in the persistence of the concerning variation is also discussed.

This paper proposes an analysis of German passe-partout compounds like Straßending ( street thing ) and Bananendinger ( banana things ) as morphological constructions. The study shows that these constructions are characteristic of spoken language and must therefore be considered with respect to the particular properties of that genre. Based on the findings about the pragmatically driven word formation an argument is made for a Construction Morphology that is based on usage and speaker interaction. This proposal can be seen as an extension of the current theory of Construction Morphology (Booij 2010). The notion of pragmatically driven word formation is illustrated by a case study of the [X- Ding ] N construction in spoken German. It will be shown that partially filled constructions with Ding as a determinatum have specific semantic and functional-pragmatic properties and are part of a complex family of passe-partout constructions.

This article discusses the origin and historical development of the German n-indefinite kein , which is an unusual negator because it does not share the initial n that marks virtually all other negatives in German. Despite the discussion about its origins going back to the nineteenth century, it is still unclear how kein first emerged and out of which other forms it developed. In this paper, new light is shed on an old controversy using new data and modern corpus-linguistic tools, in this case the Referenzkorpus Mittelhochdeutsch (ReM). The article first summarises the current state of research before presenting and analysing the data. In combination with additional evidence, the results show that certain hypotheses that have to this day been treated as accurate are in fact not viable. Subsequently, a solution that combines some of the existing theses and is compatible with the data is presented: Morphological reanalysis and the ensuing back-formation of kein’ s predecessor nehein  – in combination with a phonologically conditioned sound substitution triggered by a shift of the syllable boundary – in the context of negative concord seems the most likely candidate for an accurate explanation of the emergence and early usage patterns of kein in Middle High German. Incongruent evidence from Swiss German, however, suggests that partially convergent developments ensuing from different indefinite forms have taken place in that variety.

This paper examines the variations and functions of the deictic address pronoun du ( you ) in the satirical Baroque drama “Absurda Comica. Oder Herr Peter Sequentz” written by Andreas Gryphius. Two types of address forms dominate in the drama, which vary in a highly systematic way. The most common one is the honorific form ihr ‘you’, which appears in addresses to humans of equal social status among both craftsmen and nobles. The more intimate pronoun du mainly occurs when the characters address themselves, their body parts or feelings and deities. Even lovers use the polite pronoun ihr ; they switch to du solely when the beloved one is either absent or dead. In addition, there is a switch to du when the characters get into a quarrel, which illustrates the well-known connection of address pronouns to the expression of social deixis and politeness as well as the local, context-sensitive mechanisms of pronoun choice. Finally, generic uses of du are restricted to proverbs in the drama.

This paper examines the development of lay transcriptions of base dialects within a period of 50 years in the early 20th century in the Upper Rhine area in Alsace and Baden. I argue that the spread of spoken standard German can be documented by the development of these transcriptions. In alignment with Ganswindt (2017), it is assumed that the still not widespread standard competence at the beginning of this period is reflected in ‚misspellings‘ in the transcriptions of the dialect, since the Standard German grapheme was associated with the phonetics of the regional standard. The lay transcriptions of the Upper German delabialization by the participating teachers from Friedrich Maurer’s indirect dialect survey from 1941 and the survey of the so-called Wenkeratlas from 1887/88 serve as data. A place-by-place comparison via vector maps allows to localize variation patterns. It can be shown that the ‘misspellings’ – i. e. rounded variants in the area of delabialization – are scattered throughout the area and significantly decrease in time as the spoken German standard is spreading. This is especially the case in the area of Baden, where the amount of ‘misspellings’ diminishes from about 30–60 % to 5–30 %. In Alsace, on the other hand, the amount of ‘misspellings’ is generally much lower and consequently the decrease is as well. I argue that the reason for the difference between transcriptions from Baden and Alsace is to be found in the different repertoire structures with a diglossia with two written standard languages – French and German – in Alsace.