Abstand and ausbau languages

Last updated

In sociolinguistics, an abstand language is a language variety or cluster of varieties with significant linguistic distance from all others, while an ausbau language is a standard variety, possibly with related dependent varieties. Heinz Kloss introduced these terms in 1952 to denote two separate and largely independent sets of criteria for recognizing a "language": [1]

Contents

This framework addresses situations in which multiple varieties from a dialect continuum have been standardized, so that they are commonly considered distinct languages even though they may be mutually intelligible. The continental Scandinavian languages offer a commonly cited example of this situation. One of the applications of this theoretical framework is language standardization (examples since the 1960s including Basque and Romansh).

Abstand languages

Abstandsprache means "language by virtue of linguistic distance". Kloss suggested the English translation "language by distance", referring to linguistic differences rather than geographical separation. [1] Abstand means a distance of ongoing separation, e.g. a clearance by mechanical design. In the context of language varieties, abstand indicates the discontinuity of two dialects; in the words of Kloss, there is a "definite break" between the varieties. [2]

An abstand language is a cluster of varieties that is distinctly separate from any other language. European examples include Basque and Breton. [2] Kloss also spoke of degrees of abstand between pairs of varieties. [3] He did not specify how the differences between two varieties would be measured, assuming that linguists would apply objective criteria. [2] A standard linguistic criterion is mutual intelligibility, though this does not always produce consistent results, for example when applied to a dialect continuum. [4]

An abstand language does not need to have a standard form. This is often the case with minority languages used within a larger state, where the minority language is used only in private, and all official functions are performed in the majority language.

Ausbau languages

The German verb ausbauen (pronounced [ˈaʊ̯sˌbaʊ̯ən] , literally "to build out") expresses core meanings of "expanding" something or "developing something to completion", e.g. adding to an existing structure. (Croatian linguist Žarko Muljačić  [ hr ] translated Ausbausprache into French as langue par élaboration.) [5] Kloss suggested the English translation "language by development", referring to the development of a standard variety from part of a dialect continuum: [1]

Languages belonging in this category are recognized as such because of having been shaped or reshaped, molded or remolded—as the case may be—in order to become a standardized tool of literary expression.

Kloss identified several stages of this development, beginning with use of the variety for humour or folklore, followed by lyrics and then narrative prose. The next phase, which he considered crucial, was use of the variety for serious non-fiction. From this point, the variety could be further developed for use in technical, scientific or government domains. [6]

A standard variety developed in this way can be mutually intelligible with other standard varieties. A commonly cited example occurs in the Scandinavian dialect continuum spanning Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The three standardized languages Norwegian, Swedish and Danish (or four if Norwegian Bokmål and Nynorsk are distinguished) are mutually distinct ausbau languages, even though speakers of the different standards can readily understand one another.

This classification invokes the criterion of social and political functions of language use. The sociolinguist Peter Trudgill has linked Kloss's theoretical framework with Einar Haugen's framework of autonomy and heteronomy, with the statement that a variety is an ausbau language corresponding to the statement that it is used "autonomously" with respect to other related languages. [7] Such a language has an independent cultural status, even though it may be mutually intelligible with other ausbau languages from the same continuum. [8] This typically means that it has its own standardized form independent of neighbouring standard languages, it is typically taught in schools, and it is used as a written language in a wide variety of social and political functions, possibly including that of an official national language. In contrast, varieties that are not ausbau languages are typically only spoken and typically only used in private contexts. Trudgill expands the definition to include related varieties: [8]

[A]n Ausbau language is an autonomous standardized variety together with all the nonstandard dialects from that part of the dialect continuum which are heteronomous with respect to it i.e. dependent on it.

Roofing

Kloss described an ausbau language as providing a "roof" (German: Dach) over dependent varieties, whereas non-standard varieties without a reference standard were "roofless dialects". [9] He used the term "near-dialectized sister languages" for varieties roofed by a standard variety with which they are related but not mutually intelligible, such as Low Saxon (roofed by Standard German), Occitan and Haitian Creole (roofed by French), and Sardinian (roofed by Italian). [10]

Muljačić introduced the term Dachsprache, or "roofing language", for a dialect that serves as a standard language for other dialects. [11] These dialects would usually be in a dialect continuum, but may be so different that mutual intelligibility is not possible between all dialects, particularly those separated by significant geographical distance. In 1982, "Rumantsch Grischun" was developed by Heinrich Schmid as such a Dachsprache for a number of quite different Romansh language forms spoken in parts of Switzerland.[ citation needed ] Similarly, Standard Basque and the Southern Quechua literary standard were both developed as standard languages for dialect continua that had historically been thought of as discrete languages with many dialects and no "official" dialect.[ citation needed ] Standard German and Italian, to some extent, function in the same way. Perhaps the most widely used Dachsprache is Modern Standard Arabic, which links together the speakers of many different, often mutually unintelligible varieties of Arabic.

Distance between ausbau languages

Kloss recognized three degrees of separation between ausbau languages. [12]

When two standards are based on identical or near-identical dialects, he considered them as splits of the same standard into two or more, constituting a pluricentric language. Examples include British and American Standard English, Standard Austrian German and German Standard German, [13] or European and Brazilian variants of Portuguese. [12] High Hindi and Urdu also have a common dialect basis (Dehlavi). [14] The same is the case with Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin, [15] [16] which also have the same dialect basis (Shtokavian), [17] and consequently constitute four standard variants of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian language. [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]

Standards created from different dialects, but with little abstand, would not be considered separate abstand languages, but constitute distinct ausbau languages, as noted above for Danish, Swedish and Norwegian. [12] The concept of ausbau is particularly important in cases where the local spoken varieties across a larger region form a dialect continuum. In such cases, the question of where the one language ends and the other starts is often a question more of ausbau than of abstand. In some instances, ausbau languages have been created out of dialects for purposes of nation-building. This applies, for instance, to Luxembourgish vis-a-vis German (the vernaculars in Luxembourg are varieties of Moselle Franconian, which is also spoken in the German sections of the Moselle River valley and neighbouring French département of Moselle). Other examples of groups of vernaculars lacking abstand internally but that have given rise to multiple ausbau languages are: Persian of Iran and Afghanistan (cf. Dari); Bulgarian and Macedonian, because they have different dialect bases.

Finally, the ausbau languages may be so different that they also constitute abstand languages. Examples include Dutch versus German, Persian versus Pashto, and Tamil versus Telugu. [12]

In the former two cases, scholars do not always agree on the best classification, as they always partake, inadvertently, in the "language making" and "language unmaking" process. [23] The concept of a One Standard German Axiom in that language is a case in point that illustrates the contested nature of the first two types of ausbau languages, occasionally also the third, varying with the degree with which sociolinguistic processes are assigned relevance in a particular approach.

Change of roles over time

There are several instances of languages and language pairs that have undergone role changes over time. Low German, for instance, was both an Abstand language and a roof of local dialects in the Netherlands and Germany and in parts of the Baltic states and their formerly German vicinity. With the end of the Hanseatic League, Low German lost its status as an official language to a large degree. Approximately at the same time, Dutch started to replace Low German as a roof of the Low German dialects in the Netherlands that form today's Dutch Low Saxon group, and most Central German dialects went under the "roof" of the evolving High German. [24] Low German ceased to be spoken on the eastern rim of the Baltic Sea. Today, its dialects surviving in northern Germany have come under the roof of Standard German. [25] Local Low German dialects spoken in the Netherlands have come under the roof of Dutch. [24] This happened despite the effect of notable migration streams in both directions between the Western (Dutch) and Eastern (Prussian, now mainly Polish and Russian) areas of the region of the Low German languages, motivated by both religious intolerance and labour need. In several spots along the Dutch–German border, identical dialects are spoken on both sides, but are deemed to belong to different roofing according to which side of the border they are on. [26]

See also

Related Research Articles

A dialect is a variety of language spoken by a particular group of people. It can also refer to a language subordinate in status to a dominant language, and is sometimes used to mean a vernacular language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Serbo-Croatian</span> South Slavic language

Serbo-Croatian – also called Serbo-Croat, Serbo-Croat-Bosnian (SCB), Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian (BCS), and Bosnian-Croatian-Montenegrin-Serbian (BCMS) – is a South Slavic language and the primary language of Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. It is a pluricentric language with four mutually intelligible standard varieties, namely Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Serbian language</span> South Slavic language of the Balkans

Serbian is the standardized variety of the Serbo-Croatian language mainly used by Serbs. It is the official and national language of Serbia, one of the three official languages of Bosnia and Herzegovina and co-official in Montenegro and Kosovo. It is a recognized minority language in Croatia, North Macedonia, Romania, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic.

Sociolinguistics is the descriptive study of the effect of any or all aspects of society, including cultural norms, expectations, and context, on language and the ways it is used. It can overlap with the sociology of language, which focuses on the effect of language on society. Sociolinguistics overlaps considerably with pragmatics and is closely related to linguistic anthropology.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bosnian language</span> Standardized variety of Serbo-Croatian

Bosnian, sometimes referred to as Bosniak language, is the standardized variety of the Serbo-Croatian pluricentric language mainly used by ethnic Bosniaks. Bosnian is one of three such varieties considered official languages of Bosnia and Herzegovina, along with Croatian and Serbian. It is also an officially recognized minority language in Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, North Macedonia and Kosovo.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Arvanitika</span> Variety of Albanian traditionally spoken by the Arvanites, a population group in Greece

Arvanitika, also known as Arvanitic, is the variety of Albanian traditionally spoken by the Arvanites, a population group in Greece. Arvanitika was brought to southern Greece during the late Middle Ages by Albanian settlers who moved south from their homeland in present-day Albania in several waves. The dialect preserves elements of medieval Albanian, while also being significantly influenced by the Greek language. Arvanitika is today endangered, as its speakers have been shifting to the use of Greek and most younger members of the community no longer speak it.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Comparison of standard Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin and Serbian</span> Comparison of registers of the Serbo-Croatian language

Standard Bosnian, Croatian, Montenegrin, and Serbian are different national variants and official registers of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian language.

A standard language is any language variety that has undergone substantial codification of its grammar, lexicon, writing system, or other features and that stands out among related varieties in a community as the one with the highest status or prestige. Often, it is the prestige language variety of a whole country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diglossia</span> Community restriction of languages or dialects to specific settings

In linguistics, diglossia is where two dialects or languages are used by a single language community. In addition to the community's everyday or vernacular language variety, a second, highly codified lect is used in certain situations such as literature, formal education, or other specific settings, but not used normally for ordinary conversation. The H variety may have no native speakers within the community. In cases of three dialects, the term triglossia is used. When referring to two writing systems coexisting for a single language, the term digraphia is used.

A dialect continuum or dialect chain is a series of language varieties spoken across some geographical area such that neighboring varieties are mutually intelligible, but the differences accumulate over distance so that widely separated varieties may not be. This is a typical occurrence with widely spread languages and language families around the world, when these languages did not spread recently. Some prominent examples include the Indo-Aryan languages across large parts of India, varieties of Arabic across north Africa and southwest Asia, the Turkic languages, the varieties of Chinese, and parts of the Romance, Germanic and Slavic families in Europe. Terms used in older literature include dialect area and L-complex.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">South Slavic languages</span> Language family

The South Slavic languages are one of three branches of the Slavic languages. There are approximately 30 million speakers, mainly in the Balkans. These are separated geographically from speakers of the other two Slavic branches by a belt of German, Hungarian and Romanian speakers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mutual intelligibility</span> Closeness of linguistic varieties

In linguistics, mutual intelligibility is a relationship between different but related language varieties in which speakers of the different varieties can readily understand each other without prior familiarity or special effort. Mutual intelligibility is sometimes used to distinguish languages from dialects, although sociolinguistic factors are often also used.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shtokavian</span> Prestige dialect of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian language

Shtokavian or Štokavian is the prestige supradialect of the pluricentric Serbo-Croatian language and the basis of its Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin standards. It is a part of the South Slavic dialect continuum. Its name comes from the form for the interrogative pronoun for "what" što. This is in contrast to Kajkavian and Chakavian.

A pluricentric language or polycentric language is a language with several codified standard forms, often corresponding to different countries. Many examples of such languages can be found worldwide among the most-spoken languages, including but not limited to Chinese in the People's Republic of China, Taiwan and Singapore; English in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, South Africa, India, and elsewhere; and French in France, Canada, and elsewhere. The converse case is a monocentric language, which has only one formally standardized version. Examples include Japanese and Russian. In some cases, the different standards of a pluricentric language may be elaborated to appear as separate languages, e.g. Malaysian and Indonesian, Hindi and Urdu, while Serbo-Croatian is in an earlier stage of that process.

Autonomy and heteronomy are complementary attributes of a language variety describing its functional relationship with related varieties. The concepts were introduced by William A. Stewart in 1968, and provide a way of distinguishing a language from a dialect.

Dialectology is the scientific study of dialects: subsets of languages. Though in the 19th century a branch of historical linguistics, dialectology is often now considered a sub-field of, or subsumed by, sociolinguistics. It studies variations in language based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. Dialectology deals with such topics as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor and synchronic variation.

Heinz Kloss was a German linguist who was after World War II internationally recognised for his work on linguistic pluricentricity and linguistic minorities. Until 1945 he worked, like many philologists and linguists of German at the time, on the linguistic construction of peoples and was entangled in the NS system.

Dalibor Brozović was a Croatian linguist, Slavist, dialectologist and politician. He studied the history of standard languages in the Slavic region, especially Croatian. He was an active Esperantist since 1946, and wrote Esperanto poetry as well as translated works into the language.

Language secessionism is an attitude supporting the separation of a language variety from the language to which it has hitherto been considered to belong, in order for this variety to be considered a distinct language. This attitude was first analyzed in Catalan sociolinguistics but it is attested in other parts of the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Croatian language</span> South Slavic language

Croatian is the standardised variety of the Serbo-Croatian pluricentric language mainly used by Croats. It is the national official language and literary standard of Croatia, one of the official languages of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, the Serbian province of Vojvodina, the European Union and a recognized minority language elsewhere in Serbia and other neighbouring countries.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Kloss 1967, p. 29.
  2. 1 2 3 Kloss 1967, p. 30.
  3. Kloss 1967, p. 33.
  4. Chambers & Trudgill 1998, pp. 3–4.
  5. Goebl 1989, p. 278.
  6. Haugen 1966, p. 930.
  7. Trudgill 2004, pp. 2–3.
  8. 1 2 Trudgill 2004, p. 3.
  9. Ammon 2004, p. 280.
  10. Kloss 1967, pp. 34–35.
  11. Muljačić 1993, p. 95.
  12. 1 2 3 4 Kloss 1967, p. 31.
  13. De Cillia1 Ransmayr2, Rudolf1 Jutta2 (2019). Österreichisches Deutsch macht Schule (in German). Vienna: Böhlau. pp. 40–48.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  14. Dua, Hans Raj (1992). "Hindi-Urdu as a pluricentric language". In Clyne, Michael G (ed.). Pluricentric Languages: Differing Norms in Different Nations. Contributions to the sociology of language 62. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. pp. 381–400. ISBN   3-11-012855-1. OCLC   24668375.
  15. Ćalić, Jelena (2021). "Pluricentricity in the classroom: the Serbo-Croatian language issue for foreign language teaching at higher education institutions worldwide". Sociolinguistica: European Journal of Sociolinguistics. 35 (1). De Gruyter: 113–140. doi: 10.1515/soci-2021-0007 . ISSN   0933-1883. The debate about the status of the Serbo-Croatian language and its varieties has recently shifted (again) towards a position which looks at the internal variation within Serbo-Croatian through the prism of linguistic pluricentricity
  16. Mader Skender, Mia (2022). "Schlussbemerkung" [Summary]. Die kroatische Standardsprache auf dem Weg zur Ausbausprache [The Croatian standard language on the way to ausbau language](PDF) (Dissertation). UZH Dissertations (in German). Zurich: University of Zurich, Faculty of Arts, Institute of Slavonic Studies. pp. 196–197. doi:10.5167/uzh-215815. Obwohl das Kroatische sich in den letzten Jahren in einigen Gebieten, vor allem jedoch auf lexikalischer Ebene, verändert hat, sind diese Änderungen noch nicht bedeutend genug, dass der Terminus Ausbausprache gerechtfertigt wäre. Ausserdem können sich Serben, Kroaten, Bosnier und Montenegriner immer noch auf ihren jeweiligen Nationalsprachen unterhalten und problemlos verständigen. Nur schon diese Tatsache zeigt, dass es sich immer noch um eine polyzentrische Sprache mit verschiedenen Varietäten handelt.
  17. Gröschel, Bernhard (2009). Das Serbokroatische zwischen Linguistik und Politik: mit einer Bibliographie zum postjugoslavischen Sprachenstreit[Serbo-Croatian Between Linguistics and Politics: With a Bibliography of the Post-Yugoslav Language Dispute]. Lincom Studies in Slavic Linguistics 34 (in German). Munich: Lincom Europa. p. 451. ISBN   978-3-929075-79-3. LCCN   2009473660. OCLC   428012015. OL   15295665W.
  18. Blum, Daniel (2002). Sprache und Politik : Sprachpolitik und Sprachnationalismus in der Republik Indien und dem sozialistischen Jugoslawien (1945–1991)[Language and Policy: Language Policy and Linguistic Nationalism in the Republic of India and the Socialist Yugoslavia (1945–1991)]. Beiträge zur Südasienforschung; vol. 192 (in German). Würzburg: Ergon. p. 200. ISBN   3-89913-253-X. OCLC   51961066.
  19. Bunčić, Daniel (2008). "Die (Re-)Nationalisierung der serbokroatischen Standards" [The (Re-)Nationalisation of the Serbo-Croatian Standards]. In Kempgen, Sebastian (ed.). Deutsche Beiträge zum 14. Internationalen Slavistenkongress, Ohrid, 2008. Welt der Slaven (in German). Munich: Otto Sagner. p. 93. OCLC   238795822.
  20. Zanelli, Aldo (2018). Eine Analyse der Metaphern in der kroatischen Linguistikfachzeitschrift Jezik von 1991 bis 1997[Analysis of Metaphors in Croatian Linguistic Journal Language from 1991 to 1997]. Studien zur Slavistik; 41 (in German). Hamburg: Dr. Kovač. p. 21. ISBN   978-3-8300-9773-0. OCLC   1023608613. (NSK). (FFZG)
  21. Kordić, Snježana (2009). "Plurizentrische Sprachen, Ausbausprachen, Abstandsprachen und die Serbokroatistik" [Pluricentric languages, Ausbau languages, Abstand languages and Serbo-Croatian studies]. Zeitschrift für Balkanologie (in German). 45 (2): 210–215. ISSN   0044-2356. OCLC   680567046. SSRN   3439240. CROSBI 436361 . ZDB-ID   201058-6. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 May 2012. Retrieved 9 May 2013.
  22. Kordić, Snježana (2010). Jezik i nacionalizam [Language and Nationalism](PDF). Rotulus Universitas (in Serbo-Croatian). Zagreb: Durieux. pp. 69–168. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3467646. ISBN   978-953-188-311-5. LCCN   2011520778. OCLC   729837512. OL   15270636W. CROSBI 475567 . Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 June 2012. Retrieved 15 April 2019.
  23. Krämer1, Vogl2, Kohlemainen3, Philipp1, Ulrike2, Leena3 (2022). "What is "language making"?". International Journal of the Sociology of Language. 274: 1–27.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  24. 1 2 Stellmacher 1981, part 1.
  25. Kloss 1967, p. 36.
  26. Goltz & Walker 2013, pp. 31–32.

Bibliography

The following article contains useful definitions: