Cover not available
Part of
Constructions in Contact: Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 24] 2018
► pp. 211–249

Texas German and English word order constructions in contact

After reviewing previous accounts of Texas German (TxG) syntax, I define the basic word order constructions of English and German and identify which are identical across the languages (i.e. diaconstructions). Next, I analyze 300 TxG utterances and determine whether their syntax corresponds more closely to German, English, or German-English diaconstructions. Finally, I discuss sentences exhibiting unusual word order and how they demonstrate the need for a (Diasystematic) Construction Grammar approach.

Keywords: word order, Texas German, code-switching, Diasystematic Construction Grammar
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous accounts of Texas German word order
    • 2.1Texas German(s)
    • 2.2German word order
    • 2.3Word order in TxG
  • 3.Word order in (Diasystematic) Construction Grammar
  • 4.German word order constructions and German-English diaconstructions
    • 4.1.German word order constructions
    • 4.2English-German word order diaconstructions
      • (A)Subject precedes verb
      • (B)All verbs occur together
      • (C)Finite verbs precede non-finite verb forms
      • (D)Polar questions require do support
  • 5.Analysis of TxG word order
    • 5.1Data selection and limitations
    • 5.2.TxG clauses with German-origin verbs
      • Müssen (‘to have to’)
      • Dass (‘that’)
      • Weil (‘because’)
      • Because
    • 5.3TxG utterances with English verbs
      • Infinitival clauses
      • Polar questions
      • Subordinate clauses
      • Main clauses
    • 5.4.Summary of TxG word order
    • 5.5.(Diasystematic) constructional account of divergent TxG syntax
      • Multiple lexical transference
      • (Inaccurate) complex German structures
      • Transferring complex verb constructions with lexicogrammatical interference
      • Loan Translation of more general and ‘central’ constructions
      • Multiple transference and interference in a single clause
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.24.07dux
References
Backus, A., & Dorleijn, M.
(2009) Loan translations versus code-switching. In B. Bullock, & A. Toribio (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Code-Switching (pp. 75–94). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, J., Smirnova, E., Sommerer, L., & Gildea, S.
(Eds.) (2015) Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berman, C.
(2003) Clausal Syntax of German. Stanford: CSLI Publications. Google Scholar
Boas, H. C.
(2003) A Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
(2009a) The Life and Death of Texas German. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
(2009b) Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors. In J. Barðdal, & S. Chelliah (Eds.), The Role of Semantics and Pragmatics in the Development of Case (pp. 347–373). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C., & Sag, I.
(Eds.) (2012) Sign-based Construction Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C., & Pierce, M.
(2011) Lexical developments in Texas German. In M. Putnam (Ed.), Studies on German Language Islands (pp. 129–150). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boas, H. C., Ewing, K., Moran, C., & Thompson, J.
(2004) Towards determining the influence of internal and external factors on recent developments in Texas German phonology. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 10(1), 47–59.Google Scholar
Boas, H. C., Pierce, M., & Brown, C. L.
(2014) On the variability of Texas German wo as a complementizer. STUF – Language Typology and Universals, 67(4), 589–611.Google Scholar
Burridge, K.
(1992) Creating Grammar: examples from Pennsylvania German. In K. Burridge, & W. Enninger (Eds.), Diachronic Studies on the Languages of the Anabaptists (pp. 199–242). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.Google Scholar
Clyne, M.
(1994) What can we learn from Sprachinseln?: Some observations on Australian German. In K. Mattheier, & N. Berend (Eds.), Sprachinseln (pp. 105–122). Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
(2003) Dynamics of Language Contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, W.
(2001) Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Den Besten, H.
(1983) On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In W. Abraham (Ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania: Papers from the 3rd Groningen Grammar Talks (pp. 47–131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.
(2013 ) Order of subject, object, and verb. In M. Dryer, & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (Retrieved from [URL], Accessed on 2017–07–28.)Google Scholar
Duden
(2006) Duden: Die Grammatik. Dudenredaktion (Ed.). Mannheim: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar
Dux, R.
2017). Classifying language contact phenomena: English verbs in Texas German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 29(4), 379–430. DOI logo
Eisenberg, P., & Gallmann, P.
(2016) Der Duden in 12 Bänden: 4 – Die Grammatik. Mannheim, Germany: Bibliographisches Institut & FA Brockhaus AG.Google Scholar
Eisenberg, P.
(2006) Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik: Band 2: Der Satz. Stuttgart: Metzler.Google Scholar
Fanselow, G.
(1989) Coherent infinitives in German: Restructuring vs. IP-Complementation. In C. Bhatt, E. Loebel, & C. Schmidt (Eds.), Syntactic Phrase Structure Phenomena in Noun Phrase and Sentences (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C.
(1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language, 64(3), 501–538.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, K.
(2018) Word order in dependent clauses in Texas German. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 84, 1-19.Google Scholar
Fuller, J.
(1997) Pennsylvania Dutch with a Southern touch: a theoretical model of language contact and change (PhD dissertation). University of South Carolina –Columbia.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Glenn
(1972) Linguistic Atlas of Texas German. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.
(1995) Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(2006) Constructions at Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grewendorf, G.
(1989) Ergativity in German. Dordrecht: Foris.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haider, H.
(1986) Fehlende Argumente: Vom Passiv zu kohärenten Infinitiven. Linguistische Berichte, 101, 3–33.Google Scholar
(1990) Topicalization and other puzzles of German syntax. In G. Grewendorf, & W. Sternefeld (Eds.), Scrambling and Barriers (pp. 93–112). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Höder, S.
(2012) Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies (Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 13) (pp. 241–257). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014) Constructing diasystems. Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In T. A. Åfarli, & B. Mæhlum (Eds.), The Sociolinguistics of Grammar (Studies in language companion series 154) (pp. 137–152 ). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
This volume). Grammar is community-specific: Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar.
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G.
(Eds.) (2013) The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopp, H., & Putnam, M. T.
(2015) Syntactic restructuring in heritage grammars: Word order variation in Moundridge Schweitzer German. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(2), 180–214.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hopper, P., & Traugott, E. C.
(1993) Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Imo, W.
(2016) Grammatik: Eine Einführung. Stuttgart: Metzler.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jacobs, J.
(1986) The syntax of focus and adverbials in German. In W. Abraham, & S. De Meij (Eds.), Topic, Focus, and Configurationality. Papers from the 6th Groningen Grammar Talks, Groningen 1984 (pp. 103–127). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kathol, A.
(2000) Linear Syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, P.
(2005) Argument structure constructions and the argument-adjunct distinction. In H. C. Boas, & M. Fried (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots Constructional Approaches to Language (pp. 71–98). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keel, W. D.
(2014) German settlement varieties in Kansas. In A. W. Farris-Trimble, & J. A. Barlow (Eds.), Perspectives on Phonological Theory and Development : In Honor of Daniel A. Dinnsen (pp. 155–172). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kloss, H.
(1977) Die deutsche Schriftsprache bei den Amischen. In L. Auberger, H. Kloss, & H. Rupp (Eds.), Deutsch als Muttersprache in Kanada: Berichte zur Gegenwartslage (pp. 97–98). Wiesbaden: Steiner.Google Scholar
Kuningas, J., & Leino, J.
(2006) Word orders and Construction Grammar. In M. Suominen, A. Arppe, A. Airola, O. Heinämäki, M. Miestamo, U. Määttä, J. Niemi, K. K. Pitkänen, & K. Sinnemäki (Eds.), A Man of Measure; Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th Birthday (pp. 301–309). Turku, Finland: The Linguistic Association of Finland.Google Scholar
Louden, M.
(1992) German as an object-verb language: A unification of typological and generative approaches. In I. Rauch, G. F. Carr, & R. L. Kyes (Eds.), On Germanic Linguistics: Issues and Methods (pp. 217–231). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meurers, W. D.
(2000) Lexical generalizations in the syntax of German non-finite constructions. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 (p. 145). Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.Google Scholar
Müller, S.
(2005) German: A grammatical sketch. In A. Alexiadou, & T. Kiss (Eds.), Syntax – ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung, 2nd Edition. Berlin: de GruyterGoogle Scholar
Nützel, D.
(1998) Morphosyntactic variation and change in Haysville (Indiana) East Franconian. (PhD dissertation) Purdue University.Google Scholar
Pierce, M., Boas, H. C., & Roesch, K.
(2015) The history of front rounded vowels in New Braunfels German. In J. Bondi Johannessen, & J. C. Salmons (Eds.), Germanic Heritage Languages in North America (pp. 118–131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reis, M
(1980) On justifying topological frames: ‘positional field’ and the order of non-verbal constituents in Berman. Documentation et Recherche en Linguistique Allemande Contemporaire, 22/23, 59–85.Google Scholar
Riehl, C. M.
(2004) Sprachkontaktforschung Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
van Rimsdijk, H.
(1985) Zum Rattenfängereffekt bei Infinitiven in deutschen Relativsätzen. In W. Abraham (Ed.), Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Uszkoreit, H.
(1987) Word order and Constituent Structure in German. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Webelhuth, G.
(1992) Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wöllstein-Leisten, A., Heilmann, A., Stepan, P., & Vikner, S.
(1997) Deutsche Satzstruktur – Grundlagen der syntaktischen Analyse. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Ziem, A., & Boas, H. C.
(2017) Towards a constructicon for German. In Proceedings of the AAAI 2017 Spring Symposium on Computational Construction Grammar and Natural Language Understanding (Technical Report SS-17–02) (pp. 274–277). Stanford University.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Boas, Hans C. & Heike Wiese
2023. „Ein Land – eine Sprache?“. In Deutsche Sprache der Gegenwart, ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo
Dux, Ryan
2020. Code-switching and loan translation in German-American. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 52 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.