Focus 2003.tif 206 Focus 0" GerfllOJIStlidies The Prepositonal Case in German-American Dialects J\fichael T. Putnam T hat languages change is common knowledge among linguists. T he debate o ften ensues when linguists attemp t to dislinglilsh wherher o r not a particular change is due primarily (Q external convergence or internal adj ustment. The loss of rhe darive case, a common morphological development in German-American enclave dialects, has been the subject of extensive research in (cecm years.. Many linguists originally adhered 10 a convergence hypothesis claiming that these German-American dialecrs were assimilated more roward the case struCture o f modem Slandard American E nglish. 1 n his study "Convergence and Language Death," Lois 1-1 u rfi neS maintains Lhat the loss of lh~ dadve results in a Pennsylvania German noun sysrem dlat corresponds more closely to thaI of English. Mark Louden claims that [he "most obvious evidence of complete convergence with American English is case in nommal and pronominal morphology" ("Variation" 5). The fact that plain, i.e. nonsectarian, Pennsylvania German now has, as American English, a tVlo-case system fo r pronouns (subjecuve and objective, formally derived from tbe historical nominative: and accusative cases) and a single, common case for nouns, whe reas earher if had lhree- and tWO­ case systems, respeccivdy, has led scholars to hypmhesize that Ihe case syncretism fOllOd in 'plain' dialects such as Ohio Pennsylvania German is due primarily to encroachmCIH of American English upon [he dialect. However strong the evidence for exte rnal influences, I.e. American E nglish, might be, research dealing with other dialccml G erman ' linguistic enclaves' provides us with the opPo[Ulniry to see that this Sillft is taking place nOl only o n in the l\ lidwesl o f the United Sla tes but also in orner non-English speaking envi[Qnmems. 208 Focu.I 1m German SJlldiu It would be, of course, 100 complex [0 address all of me various German 'enclave dialects' and [helt: respective case morphology strucrures, merdore Lhis srudy will only brieRy mention studies conduC[ed In me former Soviet Union dealing with the German dialects embedded in Russian and Ukrainian language areas. Amongst the German dialects in those areas we find case syncretism similar to the patterns displayed by their counterparts in North America. Differing disrinccly from Standard English. both Russian and Ukrainian possess a rich case morphology system similar to thaI of Latin with five: degrees of inflection, hence an active and thriving dative case and its respective markers. That paradigm leveling in the case system has wken place also in modern German dialects in Central Europe and in areas in which the dominant language is not English shows that the mechanism for this analogous change is most plausibly internal. Ohio Pennsylvania German (OPG) foUows the expected histOrical paradigm of Ge[manic languages and dialens for infiecciona.1 case morphology eroSion. Case reduction by analogous change is a consistent characteristic of this language family. The case system reconstructed for Proro-lndo-Europoean (PIE) exhibits an .eight-case system. During the Germanic period we postulate a case reduction from eight to six, and during the Old High Guman (750-1050 AD) period we find only five attested. The Middle High German (1050- 1350 AD) case system evidences a four-tiu system, and aU modern dialectal German vernaculars employ sy~[ems with a maximum of mree cases.' OPG exhibits changes mat are to be expected from a maIect with Western Germanic heritage. Not only are such differences present in the various synch.ronic srnges of modern Standard German, they are also documented in the development o f current German dlalects.1 It appears th:u the accelerated rare at which these changes appear to be taking place in the case system of these dialects is due primarily to the absence of a standard orthography and prescribed grammar of rhe vernacular, i.e., there is nothing to 'hold the dialect back' from developing free of ex ternal inAuences. Agreeing with the study conducted by Janet Fuller (1997), the pronoun system in Pennsylyania German indlCiues that the surface forms in dus case system are not converging [Q English, but that there is, quite simply, The Prepositional Case 209 nothing more than a loss or dauve case marking. In summary, the case: morphology syncretism currently taking place in m.lny of lhese German-Americ:;r.n dialect communiues, when compared u'ith the same processes III other German 'enclave dialects' in areas where tlle dominant language is not English, can be attobuted by and large to IIlternal factors rather than external convergence widl American English.' t-,ljchael Putnam and Ilurfines both show thai age of speakers is the primary factor delernuning whether the diaieci speakers will employ dative fOrllls o r not; the younger the speaker, the fewer dacive forms they WIll use. Renate Born, III her 2003 study "Regression, Conve rgence, Internal Development," has shown that the loss of case distinctions occurs in the inverse order or the acquisition sequence exhibited by German children. Structures which are lost fi rst in German-American dialect communities are acquired last and, conversely, stcucrurcs which are retained longest in declining dialects emerge earliest in the child language acquisition process. ~ Born states mat "the regression hypothesis explains why in declining German enclave dialects rhe dative case tends to be replaced by the accusative rather than lhe reverse, and why certain word classes retain dauve case markers longer than others" (158). As a result or thIS aforemenuoned mflectional case s),ncrellsm, some of these German-American speech island communities exhibit a potential common prepositional case. All example or this prepositional case can bc obsen'ed development in the Volga­ Getman dialects in \'{Iesl Central Kansas. \'('iliJam Keel shows that the sentences "he was sitting in the cold water" and "we rell into the cold water" are botll produced with the definite article den after the preposition: "der hOt In dtll kalde \Vasser gesolz" and "mir sin III tim kalde Wasser gfaU" (Keel 98). Here we see lhe neuter noun dos If.'a.rser (the water) apptanng wilh bOlh da.r and dell in the above anested examples. First, [Wo-way prepositions such as Standard German itf exhibit objects marked for dative case when the matrix verb of the semence does nOt imply movement. This dearly demonstrates the arorementioned case morphology aurition undecwa)' III many German-American dialects. Second, the definite article das is expected within the neuter paradigm: while dm is the accusative definite article of masculme nouns. II appears that a merger of 210 FoCtiS on German Studies traditional neuter and masculine definite articles is taking place to form a prepositional case in conjunction with [he case syncretism occurring in these dialects. This phenomenon was first mentioned by Keel and has unfortunately not received a great amount of aneorian by scholars uncil now. The focus o f this article is to present examples in suppaH of this prepositional case in German-American dialects. After a brief presentation of the data, [he following questions \Vill be addressed: 1. Is this phenomenon really a 'separate case' or JUSt the result o f phonological conditioning? 2. Is this merely a transitional Hep towards furthe r case syncretism? 3. \,(lhy do some dialects exhibit this prepositional case, while others do nOt? P revious Accou nts o f P reposition al Case Instances of the presence of this prepositional case in research dealing with German-American dialect communities abound, contrary to me low level o f attention mat it has received. Glen Gilben's work on the retenuon and loss of case marking in Texas­ German dialects is o ne such srudy. In a detailed srudy of a modern text from FrederiCksburg, Texas, Gilbe~t describes the following siruation : "The forms o f lhe accusative have replaced [he dative almost everywhere" (Gilbert, "Pho nology" 97). Out o f 53 instances where on e would expect a dative form in comparison 'l.vi tb Standard German usage following a preposition , Gilben record s 45 accusative, 3 nominative and 5 dative forms. He amibutes the re tention o f d1C .five dative forms to eith er fixed formulae or assimilation of the case marker to a following nasal consonan t. S J. Wilson reportS o f exclusive usc of accusative forms of the personal pronouns in object Case siruations for the German in tne counties o f Lee and Fayene in Central Texas. Feminine, neuter, and plural determiners exhibit o nly one case form; masculine determiners distinguish a nominative and an oblique case. The oblique forms reRect older accusari\'e forms such as mil drn 1I[(um The Prepositional Case 211 (94). Ailernate forms for expected nelHer dative markers occur in some examples fro m Gilben's d!ssectation (1963). He no tes that in the sentence "a picture is hanging over the bed" the p[eposilional phrase is rendered as i:ber daJ bel 21 times and as i:ber dm beJ 6 times. BOlh o f these prepositional phrases translated into English mean "over the bed." The object of the preposition, das BetJ, is neuter. Similar examples arc presented for the ph rase with the double meaning of either "into/in the room" : ill dell / daf Jsi"Jer, which an individual speaker using the same form for both meanings (Gilbert, Dialect 19). As noted earlier in this article, here we see th e beginning s tages of the merger o f traditional masculine and neuter accusative definite articles forming a prepOS itional case. Keel notes: In addition to the phenomena of case distinction reduction and loss, we see here the potential development o f a transitional stage with a common prepositional case in the nemer system which merger me o lder accusative/ dative dichotomy after prepositions. (97) This notion of a prepoSitional case is based o n a sim.ilar development in the Volga-German dialects in West Cello·al Kansas. A Volga-German dialect spoken in the community o f Victoria in Ellis County, Kansas exhibits the fo Uowing case system fo r the definite ar ticle (Keel): I Nom. fAcc. ruat. [ Il rep . asc. e< en en en ~eut. '" es cen en en1. ne " " [ClOer ~urar rw, " Cle (enne " enn e Here we can ohsen'e the analogous shift of dative fo rm s with the accusative definite articles. h is also evident fro m these clata that a me rger o f the masculine and neuter analogized forms have created a prepositional case. The femmine and plural forms have not fully participated yet in the case attrition 111 Ihis dialect, therefore (hey do not exhibit the prepositional cast. Keel provides th e foUowing 212 Fonts on GrmulII Siudiu commen tary concerning the table above: ... the distincUon .. .is modified in dlar the dative forms appear after all prepositions, even III those instances where an accusauve IS refieCled in Standard German (dec hOl In den kalde Wasser gesotz "he was sitting in the cold \VaICC" VS. mir sin in den kalde Wasser gfall "we fell into me cold water"). Thus me neuter definite article follows rhe pattern of the masculine definite article after aU prepositions. The feminine article reflects a more traditional two-case distinction (common case vs. dative case) wirb prepositional usage retaining char distinction as well. (98) A word of caution must be issued when comparing these dialect forms with Standard German. Data from the 'mother dialect regions' of (hese enclave dialects from rhe M.iddle High/Early New High German period would be most desirable and preferred for a more accurate diachronic comparison. Due to dle fact mar mese dam do nOt exist, Standard German serves as the best means of comparison. This phenomenon of a prepositional case has also appeared in Gabnel Lunte's 1998 dissertation on a Ca tholic Bohemian German dialect spoken in Ellis County, Kansas. Lllnte provides me foUowing commentary and data on mis topic; The tendency of the accusath'e and dative masculine towards a common objective case is particularly evident in conjunction \\~m prepositions that are contracted with the definite article. The accusative masculine ending /n/ is predominant in a historically dative (of location) environment: /du S[(SI hinton IIJI Du silZllCho" hinltrm Tisch. 'You are already Sitting behind the table.' !bam kool sama reltonl bei Karls Ellern 'at Karl's parenrs' (Lunte 87, my emphasis) The Prepositional Case 213 It also appears that aspects o f this case are present in an Eastern Franconian German dialect spoken in Frankenmlllh , Michigan (Born). German enclave dialects in the former Soviet Union also document this intermediary case shifl. Sc.rgej t-. llfonow focused his 1940 dissertation on the development of analY(lcal forms III the Volga German dialects o f Marxstadt, Maflental, Balzer and Norka. The vernacular spoken in thiS area was a mixmre of dialects from Swabia, Hesse, and the Rhenish-Palatinare, dialects similar in morphosynractic SlrUC (lJrc 10 Ohio Pennsylvan ia German. r ... liwnow's analysis begins by analyzing Ih e continual reductio n and unification o f case endings. t-. lu onow further sta tes that "die Herstellung der syntaktischen Beziehungen [wirdl auf \'erschiedene IlilfswOrter verlagert, insbesondere \Hlf den Artikel lind die Priipositionen" (Berend 159-60). In summary to Mironow's findings, Nina Berend offers the following commentary: Der Verlust dec phoncuschen Dlfferenzlerung der Kasus fOhn in den Mundanen zu einem immer mehr urn sich grclfenden Synkretismus U11 Kasussystem. Viele sowjetdeursche t-. lundaw:n besitzen nm !loch zwei Kasus: Nominativ uuJ Akkusativ oder Nominauv und Dauv. Aber auch die Tendenz zu volligem Kasusverlust macht sich in wesen Mundanen schon bemerkbar. Dim Enfu.idelung, llleini S. AlironoJlI isl mdglirh gtll'OnUn, weil die SJnlaielisrhen Beziehllnyn hillnirhmd durrh die PrilpoliliOllln lind die Seman/ile der Verben yJemnzrichml IIlId lom;1 jorlllak pholleliJrbe /I[m'lur ube1liislig geworden lind. So hat zum Bcspicl die t'. llIndart \'on Marxstadt an dec Wolga 11m noch zwci Kasus _ den Nominativ LInd den Akkusaciv, soga r beim Personalpronomen. [ ... J Dlese Beispide - so S. Mironow - zeigen, dass skh III den Mundanen tin vom Subjekt-Objekt-Kasus unterschiedener Priipositionalkasus enrwickelt hal, in dem die Praposition mit der Form des AkkuSlU\'S des Artike1s verschmolzen ist. (158-59, my emphasis) 214 FOCUI on German S ludier The gradual eliminatio n of the grammatical impo rtance of articles marking for case is strengthened by modern syntactic theory. In rhe German srandard language [he "rich inflectional morphology [ ... ] fulfills in part purely semantic functions; on the other hand, it js in part dearly motivated syntactically" (Eisenberg 374). If case js marked in dialect meaes at all, syntactic or semantic informacion is morphologically expressed only to the eX[enr of realizing the nominative (or common case) - oblique case distinction. "Syntactic functions (e.g. nOlln~adjcctive-agreement) or semantic information (e.g. direct-indirect object rclation) are more and morc on ly a maHer of word order, nor morphology. In prepositional phrases the i.nformation is moved one step furtber leftward to the lexica l elemenr, the preposition" (Rosenberg 210). In syntax, heads of phrases are supposed to carry mo re morphological marking; this is what we are seeing here with the prepositional case, namely that the importance of me definite article is being rl(:placed by the preposition itself. New distinctions emerge, and systems that have become simpler in terms of morphology subscirute these lost items by means of grammatical information now embedded in lexical items or word order. Increased use of prepositions contributes to the loss of rhe case inflection, since presumably the preposition itself without the case ending is sufficient (0 carry the burden of meaning. Since the preposition is more specific semantically, the multi-functioned (and therefore ambiguous) case endings eventually givewa}" Objects of p repositions can never serve as the subject of the sentence in which they appea r. In the German-American enclave dialects mentioned in dus study, case amition of (he dative case reduces the possible markers for the oblique cases. NaturaUy, [he accusative case is the only option available for masculine and neU[e( nOuns. That lhe p repositions themseivl(:s carry more grammatical meaning in these dialects can be seen in the merger of 'traditional' accusative definite articles to form the prepositional case. In other words, the definite article is only significant in that it is non-nominative in prepositional phrases. Lin guist ic Universa ls and Typological Conve rgence The Prepositional Case 215 Linguists accept tha t languages are never at a static position, because \i ngllistic change is common in all languages. Edward Sapir's rheorems were constructed to ana lyze la rger tendencies at work in languages. He labeled these three major drifrs as follows (l will iabcl them as S t, S2 and S3 respectively): 51: the familiar tendency to level Ihe distinction be[Ween subjective and objecuve [lhe subject and object cases j, itself but a latc chapter in [he steady reduction o f the old Indo-European system o f synrac[ic case (163)6 52: the tendency to fixed position in the sentence, determined by the syntactic reiauot1 of the word (166) S3: the drift toward the invariable word (168) [ .. (oreover, the investigation of drift IS given new djmcnsion by relating it to comparative and typologica l hngm::;uc studies. 1n [hIS wa)" a connection is established beNleen the slUdy of drift on the one hand and the theory of gramma r on lhe other. Robin Lakoff begins by presenting "a lis t of some changes ... that occur in many or aU of the Indo-European languages, clearly nO( as the result of one bei ng influenced by the od1cr" (174). I will focus on [Wo of the proposed changes Issued by Lakoff that are relevant [Q [his paper: (1) The usc of articles, defiture and indefinite. (2) The usc of prepositions instead of case endings. (174) L'lkoff sheds funher light upon the use of prepositions in IE languages: The o lder IE languages exp ressed grammatical relationships in nouns through the use of case endings ... Later lan!:,lUages have Icndcd to develop, instead, an invariable independent noun without ending (expect for plural) and a sel of prepositions, also morphologicaUy independem, [ 0 fulfill the func tions previously performed by case endings [ ... J This change can be considered as one in fa,or o( segmentation. (174, 185) 216 Foro! 011 C~rt/J(1IJ StJldie.r All of Lakoff's common fearu res of Indo-European languages are based upon me shift fcom synthetic to analytic forms, or toward greater segmentation. This is obviously also true for the case syncretism that has occucred in German and Germanic dialects and that is occurring in lhese German-American speech communities. In most Germanic languages, the rich suffixation mat carried case, gender and number markers were replaced by nominal forms due to me Germanic Accent Shifr. The definite articles, except in dialects where they also seeve as demonstratives, were also unsuessed, hence rendering lheir importance, and in some cases, their very existence superfluous. Default Rules According to Steven Pinker, simplification frequently consists of tr.lnsformations into "de.fault rules" (pinker 256). For example, the expansion of the weak verb inflection paradigm (e.g. German past tense markings of the preterite by -Ie, English by -edinstead of the suong verb inflection by Hem allomorphy (Ablaul)) is considered to be a default rule. "Default rules afe regularities based on rhe principle to act upon the mere category (of a "noun" or a "verb" for example)" (Rosenberg 220). In Other words, where memory fails, default rules apply. The concept of difaulJ rolu may explain some processes of reductio n, such as the subsequent los~ of inflections in nouns, possessive pronouns or determine rs. At the phonological level, the reduction of the historical dative -em marking and merger with -eti could be seen as an example of this phenomenon. At the morphosymactic le\'el, Imguiscic units participating in a shift or change would most likely firsl undergo a transformation into a default .rule, and then become subject [0 possible further simplification. Caroline SmitS discusses internal changes in Towa Dutch concerning the restructuring of grammar rules related to language contact. She distinguishes th ree types of changes in her study which are parallel to the theory of defauh rules mentioned by Pinker: regularization, simpli6cation and loss of inflectional distinctions (47). This is exactly the same process thac is cu[[ently taking place in dlOse German-Amc=rican enclave dialects that exhibit a The Prepositional Case 217 uansitional prepositiona! case. First these forms are regularized, then simplification sets in, and finally the inflectional distinctions arc fu rrher eliminarcd. Rosenberg validates the application of dcfauh rules in German-American dialectology, and also explains how these processes in general could feed and promme a possible prepositional case: What, however, may be the line which links regularization and loss of morphology? The "externalization" of marking external relations could be rcgardc=d as a redisuibunon of functional features to different markers each one carrying lillie if any grammatical informacion. Given the successive simplification o f noun infl.ection, the replacement of morphological markers by determiners, then by prepositions and finall y by word ordc=1' may be intapreted as further steps of transformation intO default ruks: a determiner (wit hout morphological marking), a preposition as well as the combinatory rules of word order act upon the merc= category. (24) T he elimination of infl.c=cUona l distinctions in Getman-A me rican enclave dtalects has lead (Q [be presc=nce of "default rules," such as this proposed prepositional case. Is Th is n eally A Sepa ra te Case? But can we go as far as classifying this linguistic shift as a prepositional case as opposed to phonological leveling? After all, it appears lhat the changes present are only taking place at the phonolob>1Cal level. Consider the following statement by Bo rn concerning case assignment in Easl Franconian: East Franconian case assignment diverges considerably from standard German norms since prepositions and verbs requiring accusacive objects in standard German may require dative obiects in 218 FOCUJ on GtrRJQll S/utiiu the dialect and visa versa. The occurrence of final nasal cansanams is phonologically conditioned, so that suffixes ending in I-m/ OCCur before lexemes with initial bilabial consonants, suffixes ending in /-0/ in aU other envlronmems. (154) This same phenomenon is also mentioned by D. Chris Johnson (54). According to Thea Vennemann, wh ile "in (he case on hand, and, we can extrapolate, in all suffixing languages wiili a drift of final syUable reduction, the relarion berween phoneDc change and synlacuc change is an obvious one" (275). Vennemann argues furmer that, "clearly, the twO changes took place simuhaneously; neither was caused by the orner. Rather each depended on the mher [ ... J \X/hy should prepositions ever develop in a language with a fully functional system of case markers, so as to render the case markers redundam and invite phonetic change to step in and take them away? Phonetic change leading to reduction and loss is always going on" (284). Comparative synchronic and diachronic linguistics show dUll "every morphological system is destroyed in time by phonological change" ('ltd. in Vennemann 293). It is quite obvious to view this prepositional case as a phonological change, bur mere appears to be a furthe r reanalysis of the case morphology through this p repositional case. A strong argument against puce pl:onological change with no effects on the strucrure of the case morphology is the fact char rhe prepositional case pronoun dm is assumed not only by the masculi ne, but also by the neuter forms. The lable from the last section of this article from the Volga-German diaJect spoken in the community of Vicroria in Ellis County, Kansas illustrates this merger bet\.veen . masculine and neurer forms into a unified prepOSitional case. Viewing this phonological change in tandem with the creation of a prepositional case also fi ts nicely with Roman jakobson's regression theory of language learning. 1n brief,jakobson's regression theory is based upon the orde r in which cases are acquired by fi rst language learne rs. jakobson's research shows that people who have su ffered uauma (Q the brain will lose [heir ability to mark cases in the opposite order in which they acquired them. In mher words: the last The Prepositional Case 219 case acqui red, will be the first one lost in [he event of brain injury. In dialects that display mis case, mOSt of rhem have e.ither lost their dative case markers or use them seldom. According (Q Jakobson's regression theory, the accusative case would be the obvious choice to fill the void left by the absence o f dative case markers. In [he p reposi tional case there is reassignment and reana lysis of the case of the determiners. This also, in essence, answers the question as to whether or nOt d1is prepositional case is a transitional step towards further case syncretism or: if it will continue to develop further as a separate case. According to the regression theory and examples of dialects that display an even less complex case morphology, we can assume that this prepositional case is simply an 'extra step' that some dialects rake on their road to further case morphology erosion. Th is concept of an 'extra step' is also present in the reconstructed grammars of other o lder German and Germanic dialects. Herbert Penzl re presents the fo rms of the si llgular definite article in Middle High German with tbe following rable (Penzl, 88): Jinglilar on n om. " az '" . Uen . es es e