Advertisement

The grammar and typology of plural noun inflection in varieties of German

  • Richard WieseEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

This paper discusses varieties of German with respect to noun pluralisation, with a focus on the status of final plural schwa as in Fisch-e ‘fish, pl.’. By analysing the much-discussed plural morphology of Standard German by means of both prosodic as well as morphological principles, it is argued that final schwa in plural nouns of Standard German is not, as generally assumed, an inflectional suffix. As an alternative, an optimality-theoretic constraint-based analysis of final schwa in plurals leads to the proposal that this segment in noun plurals of Standard German arises as an inserted vowel, which is in turn the result of a specific constraint interaction. In the second part of this paper, related noun plurals are studied in a sample of diverse non-standard dialects of German. Morphological and prosodic constraints, through the well-known mechanism of differences in constraint-ranking in Optimality Theory, derive the (non-)appearance of word-final plural schwas in these dialects which are minimally different from Standard German and from each other. The constraints will include those which refer to properties of whole paradigms of word forms, not just to phonological properties of individual words. As an overall descriptive result, a micro-typology of plural formation in varieties of German emerges, and the prosodic phonology of German is demonstrated to play a crucial role in the formation of word forms.

Keywords

Dialects German language Inflection Inflectional typology Optimality theory Variation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bachmann, Armin R. 2000. Die Mundart von Eslarn in der Oberpfalz. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  2. Bartke, Susanne, Frank Rösler, Judith Streb, and Richard Wiese. 2005. An ERP-Study of German “irregular” morphology. Journal of Neurolinguistics 18: 29–55.Google Scholar
  3. Bech, Gunnar. 1963. Zur Morphologie der deutschen Substantive. Lingua 12: 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benua, Laura. 1997. Transderivational Identity: Phonological Relations between Words, University of Massachusetts: Ph.D. Thesis.Google Scholar
  5. Beyer, Ernest. 1963. La flexion du groupe nominal en Alsacien: étude descriptive et historique avec 60 cartes. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
  6. Born, Walter. 1978. Kleine Sprachlehre des Münsterländer Platt. Münster: Verlag Regensberg.Google Scholar
  7. Clahsen, Harald. 1999. Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 991–1060.Google Scholar
  8. Clahsen, Harald, Monika Rothweiler, Andreas Woest, and Gary Marcus. 1992. Regular and irregular inflection in the acquisition of German noun plurals. Cognition 45: 225–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. de Vaan, Michiel (ed). 2003. Germanic Tone Accents. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Franconian Tone Accents. Leiden.Google Scholar
  10. Downing, Laura J., Tracy Alan Hall, and Renate Raffelsiefen (eds). 2005. Paradigms in phonological theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eisenberg, Peter. 1998. Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik. Band 1: Das Wort. Stuttgart; Weimar: Verlag J.B. Metzler.Google Scholar
  12. Fakhry, Salah. 2005. Die Entwicklung des deutschen Pluralsystems im 20. Jahrhundert, German Linguistics, Philipps-Universität: Dr. phil.Google Scholar
  13. Féry, Caroline. 1994. Umlaut and Inflection in German. Potsdam: Dept. of Linguistics.Google Scholar
  14. Féry, Caroline. 1997. Uni und Studis: die besten Wörter des Deutschen. Linguistische Berichte 172: 461–489.Google Scholar
  15. Féry, Caroline. 1998. German Word Stress in Optimality Theory. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 2: 101–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gabriel, Eugen. 1963. Die Mundarten an der alten churrätisch-konstanzischen Bistumsgrenze im Vorarlberger Rheintal: eine sprachwissenschaftliche und sprachpsychologische Untersuchung der Mundarten von Dornbirn, Lustenau und Hohenems (mit Flexionslehre). Marburg: Elwert.Google Scholar
  17. Gebhardt, August. 1907. Grammatik der Nürnberger Mundart. Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.Google Scholar
  18. Giegerich, Heinz J. 1985. Metrical phonology and phonological structure. German and English: Cambridge Stidies in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Golston, Chris, and Richard Wiese. 1996. Zero morphology and constraint interaction: subtraction and epenthesis in German dialects. In Yearbook of Morphology 1995, eds. Geert E. Booij and Jaap van Marle, 143–159.Google Scholar
  20. Grimm, Jacob. 1828. Deutsche Grammatik. Göttingen.Google Scholar
  21. Hall, Tracy Alan. 1989. German syllabification, the velar nasal, and the representation of schwa. Linguistics 27: 807–842.Google Scholar
  22. Hall, Tracy Alan. 1992. Syllable structure and syllable-related processes in German. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
  23. Hall, Tracy Alan. 2002. Against extrasyllabic consonants in German and English. Phonology 19: 33–75.Google Scholar
  24. Hall, Tracy Alan. 2005. Paradigm Uniformity effects in German phonology. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 17: 225–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hayes, Bruce P. 1995. Metrical Stress Theory. Principles and Case Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Holsinger, David J., and Paul D. Houseman. 1999. Lenition in Hessian: cluster reduction and “subtractive plurals”. In Yearbook of Morphology 1998, ed. Geert E. Booij and Jaap van Marle, 159–174. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  27. Holthausen, Ferdinand. 1886. Die Soester Mundart. Laut- und Formenlehre. Norden, Leipzig: Diedrich Soltau’s Verlag.Google Scholar
  28. Inkelas, Sharon. 1998. The theoretical status of morphologically conditioned phonology: a case study of dominance effects. Yearbook of Morphology 1997: 121–155.Google Scholar
  29. Itô, Junko, and Armin Mester. 1999. The Structure of the Phonological Lexicon. In The Handbook of Japanese Linguistics, ed. Tsujimura Natsuko, 62–100. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  30. Jacobs, Neil G. 2005. Yiddish: A Linguistic Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Janßen, Ulrike. 2003. Wortakzent im Deutschen und Niederländischen. Empirische Untersuchungen und theoretische Analysen, Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf, Doct. Dissertation.Google Scholar
  32. Jellinghaus, Hermann. 1877. Westfälische Grammatik. Die Laute und Flexionen der Ravensbergischen Mundart.vol. Verlag von J. Kühtmann’s Buchhandlung. Bremen.Google Scholar
  33. Kager, René. 1999. Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kalau, Gisela. 1984. Die Morphologie der Nürnberger Mundart. Eine kontrastive und fehleranalytische Untersuchung. Erlangen: Palm & Enke.Google Scholar
  35. Keller, Rudolf E. 1961. German dialects. Phonology and morphology with selected texts. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Kenstowicz, Michael. 2005. Paradigmatic uniformity and contrast. In Paradigms in phonological theory, ed. Laura J. Downing, Tracy Alan Hall, and Renate Raffelsiefen, 145–169. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Kirchberg, Carl. 1906. Laut- und Flexionslehre der Mundart von Kirn a.d. Nahe, mit Berücksichtigung der näheren Umgebung. Straßburg: DuMont Schauberg.Google Scholar
  38. Kloeke, Wus van Lessen. 1982. Deutsche Phonologie und Morphologie: Merkmale und Markiertheit. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
  39. Knaus, Johannes. 2003. Subtraktive Pluralformen in deutschen Dialekten, German Linguistics, Philipps-Universität: M.A.Google Scholar
  40. Köpcke, Klaus-Michael. 1988. Schemas in German plural formation. Lingua 74: 303–335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kurisu, Kazutaka. 2001. The Phonology of Morpheme Realization, Linguistics, University of California at Santa Cruz: PhD.Google Scholar
  42. Lienhart, Hans. 1891. Laut- und Flexionslehre der Mundart des mittleren Zornthales im Elsass. Straßburg: Trübner.Google Scholar
  43. Lindow, Wolfgang, Dieter Möhn, Hermann Niebaum, Dieter Stellmacher, Hans Taubken, and Jan Wirrer. 1998. Niederdeutsche Grammatik. Leer: Verlag Schuster.Google Scholar
  44. Marcus, Gary F., Ursula Brinkmann, Harald Clahsen, Richard Wiese, and Steven Pinker. 1995. German Inflection: The Exception That Proves the Rule. Cognitive Psychology 29: 189–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McCarthy, John J. 2002. A thematic guide to Optimality Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. McCarthy, John J. 2005. Optimal paradigms. In Paradigms in phonological theory, ed. Laura J. Downing, Tracy Alan Hall, and Renate Raffelsiefen, 170–210. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  47. McCarthy, John J., and Alan S. Prince. 1994. Generalized Alignment. In Yearbook of Morphology 1993, eds. Geert E. Booij and Jaap van Marle, 79–153.Google Scholar
  48. McCarthy, John J., and Alan S. Prince. 1995. Faithfulness and Reduplicative Identity. In University of Massachusetts Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18: Papers in Optimality Theory, ed. Jill N. Beckman, Laura Walsh Dickey, and Suzanne Urbanczyk, 249–384. Amherst, MA: Graduate Linguistic Student Association.Google Scholar
  49. Meinhold, Gottfried, and Eberhard Stock. 1980. Phonologie der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Leipzig: VEB Bibliographisches Institut.Google Scholar
  50. Moulton, William G. 1962. The sounds of English and German. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. Neef, Martin. 1998. The reduced syllable plural in German. In Models of inflection, ed. Ray Fabri, Albert Ortmann, and Teresa Parodi, 244–265. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
  52. Pater, Joe. 2000. Non-uniformity in English secondary stress: the role of ranked and lexically specific constraints. Phonology 17: 237–274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pavlov, Wladimir. 1995. Die Deklination der Substantive im Deutschen. Synchronie und Diachronie. Frankfurt/Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  54. Pinker, Steven, and Alan S. Prince. 1988. On Language and connectionism: Analysis of a parallel distributed processing model of language acquisition. Cognition 28: 73–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Prince, Alan S., and Paul Smolensky. 1993. Optimality Theory. Constraint Interaction in Generative Grammar. New Brunswick: Rutgers University. Boulder: University of Colorado.Google Scholar
  56. Reuter, Elvira. 1989. Die Mundart von Horath (Hunsrück): Phonetik und Morphologie. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
  57. Seiler, Guido. 2003. Präpositionale Dativmarkierung im Oberdeutschen. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.Google Scholar
  58. Wegener, Heide. 1992. Pluralregeln in der mentalen Grammatik. In Fügungspotenzen, ed. Ilse Zimmermann and Anatoli Strigin, 225–249. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
  59. Wegener, Heide. 1995. Die Nominalflexion des Deutschen, verstanden als Lerngegenstand. Tübingen: Max-Niemeyer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  60. Wiese, Richard. 1986. Schwa and the structure of words in German. Linguistics 24: 697–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wiese, Richard. 1987. Phonologie und Morphologie des Umlauts im Deutschen. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 6: 227–248.Google Scholar
  62. Wiese, Richard. 1988. Silbische und Lexikalische Phonologie. Max Niemeyer Verlag: Tübingen.Google Scholar
  63. Wiese, Richard. 1996a. The Phonology of German. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  64. Wiese, Richard. 1996b. Phonological vs. morphological rules: on German umlaut and ablaut. Journal of Linguistics 32: 113–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Wiese, Richard. 1999. On default rules and other rules. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 1043–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Wiesinger, Peter. 1983. Die Einteilung der Dialekte. In Dialektologie. Ein Handbuch zur deutschen und allgemeinen Dialektforschung, ed. Besch Werner, 807–899. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  67. Wunderlich, Dieter. 1999. German noun plural reconsidered. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 1044–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich. 1970. Studien zur deutschen Lautstruktur. Studia grammatica, vol. 8. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
  69. Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich. 1980. Phonologie. In Grundzüge einer deutschen Grammatik, ed. Karl Erich Heidolph, Walter Flämig, and Wolfgang Motsch, 898–988. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institut für Germanistische SprachwissenschaftPhilipps-Universität MarburgMarburgGermany

Personalised recommendations