Karl Ille
University of Vienna

Variety Contact and the Codification of Pluricentric German:
An analysis of Austrian German markers inherited from Romance varieties

 Keywords: Austrian German – German-Romance variety contact – codification - linguistic identity  

The codification of pluricentric German today allows the distinction of several constructed standard varieties of German, examples of which being Standard German German (SGG = deutschländisches Standarddeutsch), Standard Swiss German (SSG = Schweizer Standarddeutsch), or Standard Austrian German (SAG = österreichisches Standarddeutsch). Therefore these national varieties remain distinguishable through their lexical, phonological, prosodic, graphemic, and grammatical markers. The contact of German with varieties of Romance, Slavic, and other languages contributed mainly to the lexical, phonological, and prosodic diversity of Austrian German. This analysis will focus on the specific contributions of dominant and non-dominant Romanic languages and varieties reflected in the codification of SAG. The historical context of these contributions was heralded by the migration of lower and upper classes (dominant and non-dominant varieties) during the era of the multilingual and multiethnic Habsburg Empire, the downfall of which led to a different interaction between German in South Tyrol and the new official language of Italian. Consequently this paper will also discuss the impact of this particular codification on the identity of the Austrian language community, including the possible development of a multicultural awareness.  

Austrian German can be characterized by its large number of transferences from Romance languages, especially from Italian and French.  In addition to borrowing from standard varieties, non-standardized Friulian and other non-dominant varieties of Northern Italian play a relevant role.  The specific influence of Romance languages on Austrian German are reflected in Protocol no. 10 of the Austrian accession treaty with the European Union in 1994, and an additional agreement in 2004 where the 24 (23+1) lexical austriacisms were integrated.  More than a fifth of these terms are of Romance (mostly Italian) origin (Karfiol, Marille, Marmelade, Melanzani, Ribisel).  Oxytona in SAG like Kaffee and Kanapee show a close relation to its Romance origin, whereby both origin and support through language contact is of considerable importance (FR café, canapé, IT caffè, canapè).  In comparison to SSG, other examples present a stronger phonological and graphemic link to Italian (SAG: Kassa, Polizze – SGG: Kasse, Police).  In Old Viennese the i-suffix was an incorrect marker of supposed Italianity (1 Meloni, mandschari), which possibly entered and remained in certain singular forms of SAG (1 Melanzani, 1 Maroni). Examples of austriacisms like Baraber and Tschick derive from non-dominant Northern Italian varieties or Friulian (NIT barabba, FRI cic).  These examples, which were also integrated in the Austrian German dictionary („Österreichisches Wörterbuch“ = ÖWB), are evocative of the migration of workers during the Habsburg Monarchy (Vienna as metropolitan centre of migration). The ÖWB dictionary also presents recent regional contact phenomena, such as selected South Tyrolean variants borrowed from Italian (Pergel, Identitätskarte), while other regional borrowed forms are not yet codified (Kono, Koperto).  Nevertheless the extensive codification of SAG poses difficulties for a simplified perception of Austrian German in Italy (“la lingua dei tedeschi”). In conclusion this analysis will discuss the effects of codification on the identity and awareness of the entire language community.