Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:48:08.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Tapping into German Adjective Variation: A Variationist Sociolinguistic Approach

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2022

James M. Stratton
James M. Stratton*
Affiliation:
Purdue University
*
Department of Linguistics, Purdue University, 640 Oval Drive, West Lafayette, West Lafayette, IN, 47906, USA [jamesmstratton92@gmail.com]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Following the Labovian paradigm, the present study uses variationist quantitative methods to examine the linguistic and social factors influencing adjective choices in German. By focusing on adjectives of positive evaluation (such as cool ‘cool’, toll/geil ‘great’), an analysis of over 3,000 tokens reveals that the choice of using one adjective over a competing counterpart is structured systematically. This choice is heavily constrained by the social factor age, with gender also influencing variation to varying degrees. The syntactic position of the adjective also conditions use, with some adjectives favoring predicative position and others favoring attributive or stand-alone position. Comparisons across apparent time, as well as with previous research, indicate that the semantic field of positive evaluation is a perpetually changing locus of variation. By applying variationist methods to German data, the present study illustrates how German lexis can index social meaning, paving the way for future research on German lexical variation. More broadly speaking, this study also contributes to ongoing variationist sociolinguistic research on German language variation and change.*

Keywords

variationist sociolinguisticsGerman languageadjectivespositive evaluationsocial correlateslexical variation
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 63 - 102
Check for updates
Copyright
© Society for Germanic Linguistics 2022

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.)

Footnotes

*

The author would like to thank several people for their comments on this paper. First, he would like to thank Katharina Pabst, Sali Tagliamonte, and Jochen Matthies. Second, he would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers of the Journal of Germanic Linguistics. Third, he would like to thank Thomas Schmidt for his consultation regarding the FOLK design.

References

REFERENCES

Adamzik, Kirsten. 1984. Sprachliches Handeln und sozialer Kontakt. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 1998. Deutsche Jugendsprache. Untersuchungen zu ihren Strukturen und Funktionen. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Androutsopoulos, Jannis. 2001. Von fett zu fabelhaft: Jugendsprache in der Sprachbiographie. Osnabrücker Beiträge zur Sprachtheorie 62. 55–78.Google Scholar
Auer, Peter. 2016. Wie geil ist das denn? Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 44. 69–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bach, Adolf. 1969. Deusche Mundartforschung: Ihre Wege, Ergebnisse und Aufgaben. 3rd edn. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Bailey, Guy, Wikle, Tom, Tillery, Jan, & Sand, Lori. 1991. The apparent time construct. Language Variation and Change 3. 241–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaman, Karen V. 2020. Swabian relatives: Variation in the use of the wo-relativiser. Advancing socio-grammatical variation and change: In honour of Jenny Cheshire, ed. by Karen, V. Beaman, Buchstaller, Isabelle, Fox, Sue, & James, A. Walker, 134–164. New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besch, Werner, Knoop, Ulrich, Putschke, Wolfgang, & Wiegand, Herbert Ernst (eds.). 1982. Dialektologie: ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung, vol. 2. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1993. Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing 8. 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2009. The quantitative analysis of morphosyntactic variation: Constructing and quantifying the denominator. Language and Linguistics Compass 3. 1010–1033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christen, Helen. 2003. Uu fein, welts guet und rüüdig schöön. Überlegungen zu lexikalischen Aspekten eines SchweizerDeutsch der Regionen. Gömmer MiGro? Veränderungen und Entwicklungen im heutigen SchweizerDeutschen, ed. by Dittli, Beat, Buhofer, Annelies Häcki, & Walter, Haas, 25–38. Freiburg: Universitätsverlag Freiburg.Google Scholar
Dalmas, Martine, Dobrovol’skij, Dmitrij, Goldhahn, Dirk, & Quasthof, Uwe. 2015. Bewertung durch Adjektive. Ansätze einer korpusgestützten Untersuchung zur Synonymie. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 45. 12–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dixon, Robert M. 1977. Where have all the adjectives gone? Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language” 1. 19–80.Google Scholar
Durrell, Martin. 2003. Using German: A guide to contemporary usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eichhoff, Jürgen. 2011. Jürgen Eichhoff: Wortatlas der deutschen Umgangssprachen, vol. 4. Bern: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Elmentaler, Michael, & Peter, Rosenberg. 2015. Norddeutscher Sprachatlas (NOSA). Band 1: Regiolektale Sprachlagen. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Fandrych, Christian, Meißner, Cordula, & Slavcheva, Adriana. 2012. The GeWiss Corpus: Comparing spoken academic German, English and Polish. Multilingual corpora and multilingual corpus analysis, ed. By Schmidt, Thomas & Wörner, Kai, 319–337. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gal, Susan. 1978. Peasant men can’t get wives: Language change and sex roles in a bilingual community. Language in Society 7. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heilingbrunner, Anton. 1858. Deutsche Sprachlehre nach der geistbildenden Methode, vol. 2. Regensburg: Georg Joseph Manz.Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet. 1992. An introduction to sociolinguistics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. 1991. On some principles of grammaticization. Approaches to grammaticalization, vol. 1: Focus on theoretical and methodological issues, ed. By Elizabeth, C. Traugott & Heine, Bernd, 17–35. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hundsnurscher, Franz, & Jochen, Splett. 1982. Semantik der Adjektive des Deutschen . Analyse der semantischen Relationen. Wiesbaden: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
Ito, Rika, & Sali, Tagliamonte. 2003. Well weird, right dodgy, very strange, really cool: Layering and recycling in English intensifiers. Language in Society 32. 257–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jankowski, Bridget, & Sali, Tagliamonte. 2019. Supper or dinner? English World–Wide 40. 169–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, Daniel E. 2009. Getting off the Goldvarb standard: Introducing Rbrul for mixed effects variable rule analysis. Language and Linguistics Compass 3. 359–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaiser, Julia. 2018. Zur Stratifikation des FOLK Korpus: Konzeption und Strategien. Gesprächsforschung—Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion, 19, 515–552.Google Scholar
Keim, Inken. 2007. Die “türkischen Powergirls”. Lebenswelt und kommunikativer Stil einer Migrantengruppe in Mannheim. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Keller, Rudi, & Ilja, Kirschbaum. 2003. Bedeutungswandel: Eine Einführung. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, Chris, & Louise, McNally. 2005. Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language 81. 345–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilian, Jörg. 2001. Kritische Semantik: Für eine wissenschaftliche Sprachkritik im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie, Sprachnorm, Sprachpraxis. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 29. 293–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
König, Werner, Elspaß, Stephan, & Möller, Robert. 2015. Dtv-Atlas zur deutschen Sprache. 18th edn. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1963. The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19. 273–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington. D.C.: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1969. Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language 45. 715–762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic chance, vol. 1: Internal factors. Cambridge: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, vol. 2: Social factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Leisi, Ernst. 1975. Der Wortinhalt. Seine Struktur im Deutschen und Englischen. 5th edn. Heidelberg: Uni-Taschenbücher 95.Google Scholar
Lippi-Green, Rosina L. 1989. Social network integration and language change in progress in a rural alpine village. Language in Society 10. 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Löffelad, Peter. 1989. Das Adjektiv in gesprochener Sprache. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüdeling, Anke. 2017. Variationistische Korpusstudien. Grammatische Variation. Empirische Zugänge und theoretische Modellierung (IDS Jahrbuch 2016), ed. By Marek Konopka & Angelika Wöllstein, 129–144. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüdeling, Anke, Hirschmann, Hagen, & Zeldes, Amir. 2011. Variationism and underuse statistics in the analysis of the development of relative clauses in German. Corpus analysis and diachronic linguistics, ed. By Yuji Kawaguchi, Makoto Minegishi, & Wolfgang Viereck, 37–57. John Benjamins, Amsterdam.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, Kurt. 1989. Wie sagt man in der Schweiz? Wörterbuch der schweizerischen Besonderheiten. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Mitzka, Walther, & Schmitt, Erich L.. 1951. Deutscher Wortatlas. Gießen: Schmitz.Google Scholar
Paradis, Carita. 2008. Configurations, construals and change: Expressions of degree. English Language & Linguistics 12. 317–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana, & Sali, Tagliamonte. 1989. There’s no tense like the present: Verbal-s inflection in early Black English. Language Variation and Change 1. 47–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reichel, Eugen, & Gottsched, Johann C.. 1900. Kleines Gottsched-Denkmal, dem deutschen Volke zur Mahnung errichtet. Berlin: Gottsched-Verlag.Google Scholar
Russ, Charles V. J. (ed.). 2013. The dialects of Modern German: A linguistic survey. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sankoff, David, & Pierrette, Thibault. 1981. Weak complementarity: Tense and aspect in Montreal French. Syntactic change, ed. By Brenda, B. Johns & David, R. Strong, 205–216. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Sankoff, David, Thibault, Pierrette, & Bérubé, Hélène. 1978. Semantic field variability. Linguistic variation: Models and methods, ed. By David Sankoff, 23–43. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Schenker, Walter. 1977. Modewörter als soziale Indikatoren. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 44. 282–303.Google Scholar
Schirmunski, Viktor M. 1962. Deutsche Mundartkunde. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Schlobinski, Peter. 1987. Stadtsprache Berlin. Eine soziolinguistische Untersuchung. Berlin: de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Thomas. 2016. Good practices in the compilation of FOLK, the research and teaching corpus of spoken German. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21: Special Issue on Compilation, transcription, markup and annotation of spoken corpora, ed. By John, M. Kirk & Andersen, Gisle, 396–418.Google Scholar
Stratton, James M. 2018. The use of the generic masculine, the derivational suffix -in and gender-fair innovations in unrehearsed spoken dialogue in Modern Standard German. Interdisciplinary Journal for Germanic Linguistics and Semiotic Analysis 23. 1–52.Google Scholar
Stratton, James M. 2020a. Adjective intensifiers in German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 32. 183–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stratton, James M. 2020b. Fiction as a source of linguistic data: Evidence from television drama. Token: A Journal of English Linguistics 10. 39–58.Google Scholar
Stratton, James M. 2021. Old English intensifiers: The beginnings of the English intensifier system. Journal of Historical Linguistics. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2006. Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2008. So different and pretty cool! Recycling intensifiers in Canadian English. English Language and Linguistics 12. 361–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2012. Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2016a. Teen talk: The language of adolescents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali. 2016b. Quantitative analysis in language variation and change. Spanish language and sociolinguistic analysis, ed. by Sessarego, Sandro & Tejedo-Herrero, Fernando, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, & Julian, Brooke. 2014. A weird (language) tale: Variation and change in the adjectives of strangeness. American Speech 89. 4–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, & Alexandra, D’Arcy. 2004. He’s like, she’s like: The quotative system in Canadian youth. Journal of Sociolinguistics 8. 493–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, & Alexandra, D’Arcy. 2007. Frequency and variation in the community grammar: Tracking a new change through the generations. Language Variation and Change 19. 199–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, D’Arcy, Alexandra, & Jankowski, Bridget. 2010. Social work and linguistic systems: Marking possession in Canadian English. Language Variation and Change 22. 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, & Katharina, Pabst. 2020. A cool comparison: Adjectives of positive evaluation in Toronto, Canada and York, England. Journal of English Linguistics 48. 3–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trost, Igor. 2006. Die nicht-flektierten Adjektive/The uninflected adjectives. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik 34. 374–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1972. Sex, covert prestige and linguistic change in the urban British English of Norwich. Language in Society 1. 179–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 1983. On dialect: Social and geographical perspectives. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vogt, Verena, Dorvel, Benjamin, & Galloway, Helen. 2016. 100% Jugendsprache 2017. München: Langenscheidt.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William, & Herzog, Marvin. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Weinrich, Harald. 1993. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Wiese, Heike. 2012. Kiezdeutsch. Ein neuer Dialekt entsteht. München: Beck.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiesinger, Peter. 1989. The central and southern Bavarian dialects in Bavaria and Austria. The dialects of Modern German: A linguistic survey, ed. by Charles, V. J. Russ, 438–519. Chicago, IL: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar

Dictionaries and Corpora

DGD (Datenbank für gesprochenes Deutsch [Database for Spoken German]). Available at https://dgd.idsmannheim.de/dgd/pragdb.dgd_extern.welcome.Google Scholar
Duden, s.v. “krass,” https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/krass, accessed January 2020.Google Scholar
Duden, s.v. “leiwand,” https://www.duden.de/rechtschreibung/leiwand, accessed January 2020.Google Scholar
FOLK (Forschungs- und Lehrkorpus Gesprochenes Deutsch [Research and Teaching Corpus of Spoken German]). Available at https://dgd.ids-mannheim.de/dgd/pragdb.dgd_extern.welcome.Google Scholar
Herkunftswörterbuch 2013. Etymologie der deutschen Sprache. 6th edn. Dudenverlag.Google Scholar