Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T20:25:18.407Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Classifying Language Contact Phenomena: English Verbs in Texas German

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 November 2017

Ryan Dux
Ryan Dux*
Affiliation:
Bucknell University
*
Bucknell University, Languages, Cultures, and Linguistics, 1 Dent Drive, Lewisburg, PA 17837, USA, [ryandux@utexas.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While the transfer of English nouns into Texas German has received substantial scholarly attention, there currently exist no detailed studies on the transfer of English verbs into Texas German in particular and German-American dialects in general. This paper therefore discusses English verbs that are code-switched and loan-translated into Texas German from both a synchronic and diachronic perspective, using data collected by the Texas German Dialect Project since 2001. The analysis serves two purposes. The first is to provide an overview of English verbs used by Texas German speakers: how these verbs are integrated into German structures, and whether they have become established in the Texas German lexicon. The second goal is to show how analyzing verbal transfers in contact situations underscores the dynamic, interactive nature of language contact and structure. This part of the analysis is motivated by Backus & Dorleijn’s (2009) discussion of loan translation, which emphasizes that existing classifications of language contact phenomena must be rethought, as many instances of transference are not clearly captured by existing categories. Thus, this study goes beyond a lexical analysis of English verbs in Texas German by discussing how lexical transfer interacts with morphology, semantics, and syntax.*

Keywords

Texas Germanlanguage contactcode-switchingloan translationborrowingconstruction grammar
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 379 - 430
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Backus, Ad. 2009. Codeswitching as one piece of the puzzle of language change: The case of Turkish yapmak . Multidisciplinary approaches to code switching, ed. by Isurin, Ludmila, Winford, Donald, & De Bot, Kees, 307–336. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Backus, Ad, & Dorleijn, Margreet. 2009. Loan translations versus code-switching. The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching, ed. by Bullock, Barbara & Toribio, Almeida, 75–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C. 2003. Tracing dialect death: The Texas German dialect project. Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. by Larson, Julie & Paster, Mary, 387–398. Berkeley, CA: University of California.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C. 2009. The life and death of Texas German. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C. 2010. On the equivalence and multifunctionality of discourse markers in language contact situations. 40 Jahre Partikelforschung, ed. by Harden, Theo & Hentschel, Elke, 301–315. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C., Ewing, Karen, Moran, Cheryl, & Thompson, Jana. 2004. Towards determining the influence of internal and external factors on recent developments in Texas German phonology. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics 10. 47–59.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C., & Pierce, Marc. 2011. Lexical developments in Texas German. Putnam 2011, 129–150.Google Scholar
Boas, Hans C., Pierce, Marc, & Brown, Collin L.. 2014. On the variability of Texas German wo as a complementizer. STUF–Language Typology and Universals 67. 589–611.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Hans C., Pierce, Marc, Roesch, Karen, Halder, Guido, & Weilbacher, Hunter. 2010. The Texas German dialect archive: A multimedia resource for research, teaching, and outreach. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 22. 277–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Hans C., & Weilbacher, Hunter. 2009. The unexpected survival of German discourse markers in Texas German. The Main Session. Papers from the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society (CLS 42-1), 1–15. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
Clyne, Michael. 2003. Dynamics of language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dux, Ryan. 2016. A usage-based approach to verb classes in English and German. Austin, TX: The University of Texas at Austin dissertation.Google Scholar
Eikel, Fred. 1954. The New Braunfels German dialect. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University dissertation.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, Peter. 1989. Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik. 2nd edn. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzlersche.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, Glenn G. 1965. English loanwords in the German of Fredericksburg, Texas. American Speech 40. 102–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, Glenn. 1972. Linguistic atlas of Texas German. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction approach to argument structure. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, Brian A. 2004. Bilingual language development and disorders in Spanish-English speakers. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.Google Scholar
Grosjean, Francois. 1995. A psycholinguistic approach to code-switching: The recognition of guest words by bilinguals. One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching, ed. by Milroy, Lesley & Muysken, Pieter, 259–275. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosjean, Francois. 2008. Studying bilinguals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1950. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language 26. 210–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1953. The Norwegian language in America: The bilingual community. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Höder, Steffen. 2012. Multilingual constructions: A diasystematic approach to common structures. Multilingual individuals and multilingual societies (Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 13), ed. by Braunmüller, Kurt & Gabriel, Christoph, 241–257. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 1998. Code-copying in Irano-Turkic. Language Sciences 20. 325–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jordan, Terry. 1977. The German element in Texas. Rice University Studies 63. 1–11.Google Scholar
Keel, William D. 2014. German settlement varieties in Kansas. Perspectives on phonological theory and development: In honor of Daniel A. Dinnsen, ed. by Farris-Trimble, Ashley W. & Barlow, Jessica A., 155–172. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, Judith F., Dussias, Paola E., Bogulski, Cari A., & Valdes Kroff, Jorge R.. 2012. Juggling two languages in one mind: What bilinguals tell us about language processing and its consequences for cognition. The psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 56, ed. by Ross, Brian, 229–262. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Kupietz, Marc, Belica, Cyril, Keibel, Holger, & Witt, Andreas. 2010. The German reference corpus DeReKo: A primordial sample for linguistic research. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2010), ed. by Calzolari, Nicoletta, Choukri, Khalid, Maegaard, Bente, Mariani, Joseph, Odijk, Jan, Piperidis, Stelios, Rosner, Mike, & Tapias, Daniel, 1848–1854. Valletta: European Language Resources Association (ELRA).Google Scholar
Lambert, Marcus Bachman. 1924. A dictionary of the non-English words of the Pennsylvania-German dialect: With an appendix. Lancaster, PA: Pennsylvania German Society.Google Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2009. Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1981. Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. Historicity and variation in Creole studies, ed. by Highfield, Arnold & Valdman, Albert, 52–78. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1997. Code-switching processes: Alternation, insertion, congruent lexicalization. Language choices: Conditions, constraints and consequences, ed. by Pütz, Martin, 361–380. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 2002. Contact linguistics: Bilingual encounters and grammatical outcomes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, Carol. 2006. Multiple voices. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Owens, Jonathan. 1996. Idiomatic structure and the theory of genetic relationship. Diachronica 13. 283–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfaff, Carol W. 1979. Constraints on language mixing: Intrasentential codeswitching and borrowing in Spanish/English. Language 55. 291–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierce, Marc, Boas, Hans C., & Roesch, Karen. 2015. The history of front rounded vowels in New Braunfels German. Germanic heritage languages in North America, ed. by Bondi Johannessen, Janne & Salmons, Joseph C., 118–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Putnam, Michael T. (ed.). 2011. Studies on German language islands. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmons, Joseph C. 1983. Issues in Texas German language maintenance and shift. Monatshefte 75. 187–196.Google Scholar
Schach, Paul. 1951. Semantic borrowing in Pennsylvania German. American Speech 26. 257–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomason, Sarah G. 2003. Contact as a source of language change. The handbook of historical linguistics, ed. by Joseph, Brian D. & Janda, Richard D., 687–712. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treffers-Daller, Jeanine. 1998. The IC model and code-switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1. 98–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weilbacher, Hunter. 2011. Texas German discourse pragmatics: A preliminary study of the English-origin discourse markers of course, see, and now. Putnam 2011, 455–474.Google Scholar
Wichmann, Søren, & Wohlgemuth, Jan. 2008. Loan verbs in a typological perspective. Aspects of language contact: New theoretical, methodological and empirical findings with special focus on romancisation processes, ed. by Stolz, Thomas, Bakker, Dik, & Salas Palomo, Rosa, 89–121. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Joseph. 1977. The German language in Central Texas today. Rice University Studies 63. 47–58.Google Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2003. An introduction to contact linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wohlgemuth, Jan. 2009. A typology of verbal borrowings. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar