Article published In:
Language and Cultural Values: Adventures in applied ethnolinguisticsEdited by Bert Peeters
[International Journal of Language and Culture 2:2] 2015
► pp. 269–293
Edited by Bert Peeters
[International Journal of Language and Culture 2:2] 2015
► pp. 269–293
German Ordnung
A semantic and ethnopragmatic analysis of a core cultural value
This study aims to illustrate the intricate connections that exist between features of a certain language and underlying culture-specific conceptualizations. The analysis sheds new light on a German cultural core value, namely, Ordnung “order,” its relationship to other cultural themes, and the influence it exerts on German interpersonal style. To reach a better understanding of the German core value Ordnung “order” as it relates to other German cultural themes, we first provide an analysis of the common expressions alles (ist) in Ordnung “everything [is] in order” and Ordnung muss sein “there has to be order.” This will be followed by an analysis of the social descriptor term locker “loose.” We seek to illustrate the merits of a perspective in language and culture studies that is truly culture-internal and can thus facilitate cross-cultural understanding, and we do so by applying the principles of the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach to semantic and ethnopragmatic description.
References (23)
Ameka, F.K. (2009). Access rituals in West African communities: An ethnopragmatic perspective. In G. Senft & E.B. Basso (Eds.), Ritual communication (pp. 127–152). New York: Berg.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. New York: Cambridge University Press. 
Collins German dictionary & grammar (2010). (6th ed.). Glasgow: HarperCollins Publishers.
Duden (2011). Deutsches Universalwörterbuch (7th ed.). Mannheim: Dudenverlag.
Filatkina, N. (2015). Diskurshistorische Analysen des Begriffs “Zukunftsangst” anhand des SPIEGEL-ONLINE-Archivs. Sprachwissenschaft, 40(1), 79–126.
Gladkova, A. (2013). “Is he one of ours?” The cultural semantics and ethnopragmatics of social categories in Russian. Journal of Pragmatics, 551, 180–194.
Goddard, C. (Ed.). (2006a). Ethnopragmatics: Understanding discourse in cultural context. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2006b). Ethnopragmatics: A new paradigm. In C. Goddard (Ed.), Ethnopragmatics (pp. 1–30). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. (2014).
Have to, have got to, and must: NSM analyses of English modal verbs of “necessity”. In M. Taboada & R. Trnavac (Eds.), Nonveridicality and evaluation: Theoretical, computational and corpus approaches (pp. 50–75). Leiden: Brill.
Goddard, C., & Cramer, R. (Forthcoming). “Laid back” and “irreverent”: An ethnopragmatic analysis of two cultural themes in Australian English communication. In D. Carbaugh (Ed.), Handbook of communication in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Routledge.
Goddard, C., & Ye, Z. (2015). Ethnopragmatics. In F. Sharifian (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of language and culture (pp. 66–84). New York: Routledge.
Hammerich, K., & Lewis, R.D. (2013). Fish can’t see water: How national culture can make or break your corporate strategy. Chichester: John Wiley. Retrieved from: [URL]
Hofstede, G.H. (22001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Institut für Deutsche Sprache (2014). Deutsches Referenzkorpus/Archiv der Korpora geschriebener Gegenwartssprache 2014-II. Mannheim. Retrieved from: [URL]
Lewis, R.D. (2006). When cultures collide: Leading across cultures (3rd ed.). Boston: Nicholas Brealey.
Peeters, B. (2013). Râler, râleur, râlite: discours, langue et valeurs culturelles. In C. Claudel, P. von Münchow, M. Pordeus, F. Pugnière-Saavedra, & G. Tréguer-Felten (Eds.), Cultures, discours, langues: nouveaux abordages (pp. 117–141). Limoges: Lambert-Lucas.
Ritter, J., & Gründer, K. (1984). Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie (13 vols.1). Basel: Schwabe.
WDG (1952–1977). Wörterbuch der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (6 vols.1). Berlin: Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften.
Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Understanding cultures through their key words: English, Russian, Polish, German, and Japanese. New York: Oxford University Press.
. (1998). German “cultural scripts”: Public signs as a key to social attitudes and cultural values. Discourse & Society, 9(2), 241–282.
. (1999). Emotions across languages and cultures: Diversity and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
. (2014). Can there be common knowledge without a common language? German “Pflicht” versus English “duty”. Common Knowledge, 21(1), 141–171.
Yoon, K.-J. 2011. Understanding cultural values to improve cross-cultural communication: An ethnopragmatic perspective to Korean child rearing practices. The Journal of Studies in Language, 261, 879–899.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Elbek, Laust Lund & Peter Starke
2024. Registers of security: The concept of tryghed in Danish politics. Security Dialogue 55:2 ► pp. 216 ff. 
Ferraro, Marisa
2024. Nurturing Time in Nature: Lessons from Waldkindergarten. In Educational Research and the Question(s) of Time, ► pp. 483 ff.
Goddard, Cliff, Tine-Marie Junker & Zhengdao Ye
2024. Chapter 11. Security , Sicherheit , ānquán
. In The Cultural Pragmatics of Danger [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 346], ► pp. 217 ff.
Borg, Ingwer & Dieter Hermann
2023. Attitudes toward crime(s) and their relations to gender, age, and personal values. Current Research in Behavioral Sciences 4 ► pp. 100111 ff.
Yair, Gad
2020. Hierarchy versus symmetry in German and Israeli science. American Journal of Cultural Sociology 8:2 ► pp. 214 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 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.