• The Conference
  • Home
  • Programme
  • Venue & directions
  • Organizing Committee
  • Scientific Committee
  • Exhibitors & sponsors
  • Satellite events
  • Conference Party
• Past & future
  • Previous symposia
  • Finland 2014
  • Spain 2016
• About FU Berlin
  • University homepage
  • Humanities at FU

Programme: accepted abstracts

Abstract ID: 463

Part of Session 157: Dialect Perceptions in the City (Other abstracts in this session)

Linguistic awareness among adolescents in the Stuttgart area

Authors: Svenstrup, Christoph Hare
Submitted by: Svenstrup, Christoph Hare (University of Freiburg, Germany)

Baden-Württemberg, the southwestern part of Germany, is traditionally seen as being a dialectal stronghold where the geographically bound dialects are widely used except for in formal and public speech (Ruoff 1997: 145). Nevertheless, more recent studies show that there is a development going on towards a spoken vernacular characterised by its lack of ‘traditional’ dialect and ‘standard’ features (Spiekermann 2004). Perception studies involving adolescents from the area show a decline of ‘prestigiousness’ of the local dialects on the attitudinal level (Svenstrup forthc.).   

This paper is concerned with what adolescents in Stuttgart (the capital of and largest city in Baden-Württemberg) and the surrounding area have to say about the linguistic styles (Coupland 2007) they use and encounter in their day-to-day interaction. A series of 14 group interviews was conducted to investigate their metalinguistic awareness, giving the adolescents a possibility to comment on their perception of the linguistic setting of the area and their everyday lives.

The interviews show how the informants negotiate and enregister (Agha 2007) linguistic styles and stereotypical labels like Hochdeutsch (‘standard’ German), Schwäbisch (Swabian, the local dialect), Strassensprache (street language), and Kanaksprache (wog/foreigner (derogatory) language). It is revealed how they perceive these styles and labels, and how access to the available styles is not only a matter of knowledge but also determined by an interplay between contextually conditioned restrictions, ideologies and language norms, and social persona.

All in all the informants’ account of the linguistic situation is in accordance with Spiekermann (2004). There is no doubt that Schwäbisch is used to a lesser extent than what Ruoff (1997) describes. Even informants born and raised in some of the smaller study locations do not think they can lay claim to be speaking ‘pure’ Schwäbisch, or their access to use it is disputed by their peers. Hochdeutsch is important for school and career and ‘must’ be learned, but Strassensprache is much more interesting and important to them – regardless if they have, or are allowed, access to use it or not.

References

• Agha, A. (2007), “Language and social relations”, Cambridge University Press,   Cambridge/New York/Melbourne/Madrid/Cape Town/Singapore/São Paulo.

• Coupland, N. (2007), “Style: Language Variation and Identity”, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York/Melbourne/Madrid/Cape Town/Singapore/São Paulo.

• Ruoff, A. (1997), “Sprachvarietäten in Süddeutschland”, in “Varietäten des Deutschen. Regional- und Umgangssprachen” (G. Stickel, ed.), 142-154, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.

• Spiekermann, H. (2004), “Regionale Standardisierung, nationale Destandardisierung”, in “Standardvariation – Wie viel Variation verträgt die deutsche Sprache?” (L. M. Eichinger & W. Callmeyer – eds.), 100–125, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.

• Svenstrup, C. H. (forthcoming), “Language attitudes and linguistic awareness among adolescents from the Stuttgart area”.