INTERACCIONES: RECONSTRUYENDO LA RED

In this section we will concentrate on the linguistic characteristics of German in East Germany, considering the different models which were accepted as standard and the differences in actual usage of spelling, pronunciation, grammar and lexis.

5.2.1

Spelling and the two Dudens

The spelling of German has been regulated by Duden Rechtschreibung of which two separate volumes appeared from 1951 onwards, one in West Germany (Mannheim) and one in East Germany (Leipzig). In Mannheim the fifteenth to nineteenth editions appeared from 1955 to 1986; in Leipzig the fourteenth to eighteenth editions appeared from 1951 to 1985. One early comparison of the entries under A in the Leipzig Duden volumes of the fourteenth edition 1951, fifteenth edition 1957 and the Mannheim Duden volumes of the fourteenth edition 1954 by Betz (1960) revealed that the differences between the Duden Rechtschreibung volumes, apart from the presence or absence of particular words or meanings, lay in a greater or lesser flexibility in the recognition of more colloquial forms, or in the way variants were allowed or not. The treatment of unstressed e was particularly diverse. The Mannheim Duden had only the form abstehen ‘to stand away; to stick out’, whereas the Leipzig Duden allowed both abstehen and abstehn, the latter form being found in colloquial usage in West Germany. The verbs ending in -eln and -ern and the nouns derived from them showed a similar discrepancy in the two volumes: the Mannheim Duden had only Abwickler ‘liquidator’, Aufrüttelung ‘shake up’, whereas the Leipzig Duden had two forms, one with e and the other without, Abwick(e)ler, Aufrütt(e)lung.

Both volumes, however, were inconsistent in other instances: the Leipzig Duden had Anforderung, whereas the Mannheim volume had Anford(e)rung. The gen.

sg. masculine and neuter forms of nouns were also treated inconsistently by the two volumes, although most of the items affected were foreign or scientific words.

The Mannheim Duden had Aldehyds, Alkaloids as the gen. sg. of Aldehyde, Alkaloid, whereas the Leipzig Duden had the forms Aldehyd(e)s, Alkaloid(e)s.

These differences arose because both volumes were aiming at different linguistic models. The Mannheim Duden, which is also authoritative in Austria and Switzerland, gave more weight to the written language and formal usage, whereas the Leipzig Duden apparently took colloquial and spoken usage more into account. More important differences occurred where there were genuine

variants, for example in pl. forms, or in the strong or weak gen. sg. forms of nouns. The Mannheim Duden gave only Ahn(e)s (the strong form) as the gen. sg.

of Ahn ‘ancestor’, whereas the Leipzig Duden had both Ahnes (strong) and Ahnen (weak). On the other hand, the Leipzig Duden gave only the weak forms Asteroiden and Partisanen as the gen. sg. of Asteroid and Partisan, whereas the Mannheim Duden had both -es and -en. The only pl. form given for Alk ‘auk’ by the Mannheim Duden was Alke whereas the Leipzig Duden had both Alke and Alken. On the other hand, the Leipzig Duden had only Aulen as the pl. of Aula

‘assembly hall, auditorium’, whereas the Mannheim Duden had both Aulen and Aulas. The Leipzig Duden was more generous in allowing fluctuation in grammatical gender. The Mannheim Duden had only das Anerkenntnis

‘recognizance’ and das Ar ‘are’ (measurement = 100 sq. m.), whereas the Leipzig Duden also allowed die Anerkenntnis and der Ar. In the case of the animal ‘alpaca’ the Leipzig Duden allowed only der while the Mannheim Duden had das. The wool of the ‘alpaca’ was, however, always das in both volumes.

These fluctuations were instances of genuine variants whose usage had not completely settled down to a norm.

If one looked up the instances where there was fluctuation in grammatical gender, strong or weak gen. sg., or between pl. forms according to Duden Grammatik one found that these forms showed the same fluctuation in both Duden volumes, for example des Bauers or Bauern; die Knuste or Knüste ‘crust of bread’. Similarly verbs such as backen and melken were recorded with weak and strong past tense forms in both Duden volumes.

The situation has changed since Betz did his comparison and the Mannheim Duden of 1973 and the Leipzig Duden of 1972 were much more similar than the editions which Betz examined. In most cases the Mannheim volume followed the Leipzig volume in allowing more optional masculine and neuter gen. sg. forms with -(e)s instead of only with -es. The Leipzig Duden followed the Mannheim volume in allowing both anhangsweise and anhangweise when before anhangsweise was the sole Mannheim form and anhangweise the sole Leipzig form. The Mannheim Duden, on the other hand, followed the Leipzig volume in recommending only das Alpaka for the wool of the ‘alpaca’ and adding an optional die Anerkenntnis (for legal language) and an optional der Ar. One puzzling inconsistency remained in the Mannheim Duden: unstressed e before verbs ending in -rn could be omitted, wandern, but ich wand(e)re, however unstressed e before verbs ending in -In could not be omitted, wandeln, ich wandele.

The Leipzig Duden had both ich wand(e)re and ich wand(e)le. However, in the case of adjectives the Mannheim and Leipzig Duden volumes agreed in optionally omitting e before -lig, for example langschäd(e)lig ‘dolichocephalic’.

Comparison of the entries under any letter of the two most recent Duden volumes showed far fewer discrepancies, even of a minor kind, than when Betz made his comparison in 1960. Since these volumes were regarded as normative and prescriptive the fact that they seemed to be coming closer together was indicative of the will and desire to create one norm.

Longer-term studies of the two Duden Rechtschreibung volumes show how similar they became. Sauer (1988:154f.) traces the fate of thirty-five East German formations, including some names, which appeared frequently in the 1950s and 1960s. Nine have disappeared; eight remained solely in the Leipzig Duden: Friedenskämpfer, Kulturbund, Lernaktiv, MEGA (= Marx-Engels-Gesamtausgabe), Operativplan, Politökonomie, Praktizismus, Sozialdemokratismus’, seven appeared in both volumes, but marked either

‘DDR’— Traktorist, Versöhnler, volkseigen—or ‘russisch’—Kasch—or ‘in Ostblockstaaten’—Diversant, Politbüro, Spartakiade; while seven appeared without any label in both volumes: Dispatcher, Exponat, Festival, Kombine, Massenorganisation, Sowjetmensch, Westberlin/ West-Berlin. These latter examples show how the language in West Germany absorbed some Eastern formations. Two examples, Komplexbrigade, Kursist, only appear in the Mannheim Duden but were marked ‘DDR’! The two final words only appear in the Mannheim Duden, Jarowisation, marked ‘russisch’ and Abgabesoll with no label. Sauer emphasizes the similar tendencies in both volumes and wishes for an all-German Duden which has now come true (see 5.2.7). The evidence gained from the common similarities and common variants was a very strong pointer to the fact that German in East and West Germany was not in danger of splitting into two languages, at least as far as the normative models provided by the Duden Rechtschreibung volumes which dealt with spelling and inflectional morphology were concerned.

5.2.2 Pronunciation

Linguists in East Germany also turned their attention to the norms of pronunciation. Their aim was not to produce a standard just for East Germany but to help in creating a general standard for both German states which was based on empirical descriptive studies, and was not merely prescriptive. In 1961 a separate pronouncing dictionary was produced in East Germany, Wörterbuch der deutschen Aussprache (WDA), whereas in West Germany two were produced:

Siebs, Deutsche Aussprache (latest edition 1969) and the Duden Aussprachewörterbuch, (first edition 1974). The WDA, with its detailed phonetic introduction, was based on empirical studies of the pronunciation of formal reading styles used by news readers and other figures in the mass media. Being based on empirical studies it allowed many pronunciations which the West German Siebs volume, even in its latest edition (1969), does not countenance, or at least only in a restricted measure. The most striking example of this was the treatment of postvocalic r (for a phonetic description of these sounds see p. 128).

The dental [r] or the uvular [ ] were both considered to be equally permissible in WDA, and Siebs (1969) also concurs in this. Vocalization of postvocalic r, however, was allowed only by Siebs (1969) in the word der [d ], whereas WDA allowed it in the following environments: after long vowels, er, Uhr, and in

the unstressed prefixes er-, ver-. In both of these environments, the letter r was pronounced as a central vowel [ ]. In the final syllable -er, r fuses with the unstressed e to form the same central vowel [ ]. In the entries in the WDA the vocalized r was written in italics, as was the preceding unstressed e: - r. The vocalization of postvocalic r has been recognized by West German works now (Russ 1991:329). Similarly unstressed -en was allowed to be pronounced as a syllabic [ ] or assimilated to the place of articulation of the preceding consonant, for example [ge b n, ge b , ge b ]. To show this, the ending -en and the preceding stem consonant were all written in italics, for example [ge b n]. Although it allows many features of the spoken language to become part of the model for pronunciation, it too, like Siebs in all its editions, was heavily bound to the North German model and spelling. Aspiration was prescribed for the initial voiceless stops [p t k], and a labio-dental pronunciation, [v], for w in Wein; in addition long half-open [ ] was recommended for the spelling of ä when it designated a long vowel. There was only a shift of model here in the direction of allowing optionally many assimilations which were characteristic of most spoken language: for instance, the vocalization of postvocalic r is very widespread in many styles of speech. Otherwise it remains firmly rooted in the North German model. This was hardly surprising since East Germany contained large Low German areas in the north which adopted standard German orthography and pronounced the words largely as they saw them written.

Although in East Germany there were regions such as Thuringia and Saxony in which, similar to the Rhineland, Bavaria and Swabia, the spoken language of the educated people had regional colouring and although Walter Ulbricht and many of his followers had clear regional Upper Saxon accents, there was certainly no sign that this accent was becoming the model pronunciation in East Germany.

5.2.3

Grammatical differences

Some differences of inflection such as strong or weak inflection, differing pl.

forms and fluctuations in grammatical gender have been dealt with in 5.2.1. The whole area of grammar is more difficult to describe since it is much more extensive than spelling or pronunciation. No corresponding volume to Duden Grammatik was produced, although grammars appeared, for example Helbig and Buscha (1974), Jung (1966) and Schmidt (1964), which describe no differences in grammar between East and West German. Even the Wörterbuch der Sprachschwierigkeiten (1984) shows the same kind and instances of variation within the written language which have been covered by Duden Hauptschwierigkeiten (1965), Duden Zweifelsfälle der deutschen Sprache (1972) and Richtiges und gutes Deutsch, Wörterbuch der Zweifelsfälle (1985). The developmental trends among nouns such as the loss of gen. inflections, increase of von instead of the gen., lack of agreement in noun phrases in apposition, increase of the two pl. formations, adding -s and adding umlaut and -e, and

trends among verbs such as change from strong verb to weak and increased use of the perfect and the subjunctive with würde, were recorded in texts in both East and West Germany (Braun 1987; Sommerfeldt et al. 1988).

5.2.4

Differences in vocabulary

Linguists in both East and West Germany recognized that the main differences between the language used in their respective states were at the level of vocabulary.

The morphology and syntax were the same, with the small variations that we have seen in the two Duden Rechtschreibung volumes. The vocabulary, however, showed not only differences in word stock but also in the meaning of words. The vast majority of differences in vocabulary resulted directly from the different political, social and economic systems of the two states. The main lexicographical work produced in East Germany was the Wörterbuch der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (WDG), which appeared in six volumes between 1966 and 1971. A detailed discussion of the whole work is (Malige-Klappenbach 1986). Although conceived as valid for the whole German speech community, from volume 4 (M—Schinken) (1974) the work took on an explicit ideological, Marxist-Leninist, nature. In a foreword to volume 4 we can read the following:

In den sprachlichen Unterschieden zwischen der DDR und der BRD, die hier nur skizziert werden konnten, manifestiert sich die ökonomische, politische, inbesondere aber die ideologische Konfrontation zweier Weltsysteme. Das Wörterbuch der deutschen Gegenwartssprache wird das erste semantische Wörterbuch sein, das dieser Konfrontation auf linguistischem Gebiet Rechnung trägt.

(WDG, 4, 1974: II, W.Neumann and R.Klappenbach) (‘In the linguistic differences between the GDR and the Federal Republic of Germany, which can only be outlined here, the economic, political, especially the ideological confrontation of two world systems manifests itself. The dictionary of modern German will be the first semantic dictionary which takes account of this confrontation at the linguistic level.’)

New words created for items and concepts particular to the GDR can be classified linguistically as neologisms (Neuwörter), new formations (Neuprägungen) and new meanings (Neubedeutungen). Neologisms are generally foreign words, for example Aktiv ‘work team’, Aspirantur ‘research assistantship’, whereas new formations have been created by using existing words or morphemes, for example Arbeiterstudent, Arbeitsbrigade, Autorenkollektiv. New meanings gave an extra meaning to an already existing word, for example Brigade, whose meaning was extended from referring to soldiers to workers, and differenzieren ‘to assess the delivery of agricultural

products’. Of the three processes of producing new words, new formations were the most frequent, followed by new meanings, with neologisms coming a long way behind. A sampling of words from the letters A-K of WDG showed that there were 250 new formations, 41 new meanings but only 12 neologisms pertaining to GDR items and concepts. A useful smaller dictionary of specifically East German words, written from a West German perspective using the same classification, is Kinne and Strube-Edelmann (1981). A popular account is Ahrends (1989).

Hellmann (1980) has a different, more detailed, classification, giving weight to meanings, which is taken up by Schlosser (1990: 13–16). Hellmann distinguishes Lexemspezifika which only occur in one state but for the same, or similar, object or concept, for example Bundestag (Federal Republic of Germany) and Volkskammer (GDR), and Bedeutungsspezifika, where the same word has a different meaning in each state. The new meanings are most striking when they refer to political concepts, for example Friede, Freiheit, Demokratie, Kultur.

Connected with the Bedeutungsspezifika are the Wertungsspezifika, where the same words, with similar meanings in each state, have either positive or negative connotations: christlich, idealistisch, Dissident were positive in the Federal Republic of Germany and negative in the GDR, whereas Kommunist, Revolution, Klassenkampf, Planwirtschaft were negative in the Federal Republic of Germany but positive in the GDR. There are also Häufigkeitsspezifika, words used typically with great frequency in each state: friedliebend, sozialistisch, Qualifizierung, umfassend, allseitig, Produktion, Massen, Kreis, wir, unser in the GDR and freiheitlich, Partnerschaft, Markt, Preis, dynamisch, Angebot, Ansicht in the Federal Republic of Germany. Yeandle (1991), as well as giving a detailed study of the meaning of Frieden, a Bedeutungsspezifikum in the GDR, has a table showing the most frequent words in Neues Deutschland, the top ten of which were: unser, neu, Arbeit, Partei, sozialistisch, Republik, Betrieb, Genosse, Volk, Frieden.

To illustrate in more detail the vocabulary of German in the GDR we will refer to several different areas of social, political and economic activity. In the examples which follow the definitions are translations into English of those in German in the WDG.

East Germany was characterized by a total reorganization of the industrial and employment system and it was in this area that the greatest number of new coinings were to be found. Manual-industrial workers were organized into different units: the smallest unit of workers was die Brigade, which could be led by ein(e) Brigadeleiter(in), or der Brigadier, pronounced [brigadi r] the latter term also being used for a rank in the army. Four new compounds existed with Brigade as the first component, Brigadeleiter(in), Brigadeplan, Brigadestützpunkt, and seventeen as the last component, (with people) Schülerbrigade (with machines) Traktorenbrigade, and (with activities) Baubrigade, Erntehilfsbrigade. Another unit was das Kollektiv, pl. -e or -s, ‘a work or production group for the achievement of common goals’. Kollektiv

occurred as the first component of nine compounds, for example Kollektivaustellung, Kollektivjäger, Kollektivwirtschaft, and as the last component of nineteen com-pounds: for example Autorenkollektiv, Architektenkollektiv, Jugendkollektiv, Schriftstellerkollektiv, Schulkollektiv.

There was also das Aktiv, pl. -s, (or seldom -e), ‘a group of workers which strives collectively to fulfil socio-political economic and cultural tasks and strives for above average achievements’. This word also appears as the last part of five compounds: Elternaktiv, Ernteaktiv, Gewerkschaftsaktiv, Lernaktiv, Parteiaktiv (the first part can be a noun or a verb). A worker with ‘exemplary and above-average achievements’ was called der/die Aktivist(in), pl. -en, and this word too formed part of six compounds: Aktivistenabzeichen, Aktivistenarbeit, Aktivistenbewegung, Aktivistendissertation, Aktivistenehrung, Aktivistennadel (worn as a lapel badge). The word der Bestarbeiter was also used for a worker with similar achievements. If the worker concerned had innovated a process then the word der Neuerer, ein Neuerer, which was also used in West Germany, was used but in East Germany it had become specialized and was only applied to industrial situations. Furthermore there were compounds with Neuerer- as the first element: Neuererbewegung, Neuererbrigade, Neuererkollektiv, Neuerermethode, Neuerervorschlag, Neuererzentrum. The larger unit in which workers function was der Betrieb, also used in West Germany with the same meaning, but in East Germany there were twenty-three new compounds with Betrieb(s)- as the first element. The meaning of most of them was obvious, for example Betriebsferienlager, Betriebsfonds, Betriebsgewerkschaftsgruppe, Betriebsplan, Betriebswandzeitung. However, Betriebsverkaufsstelle, was a shop

‘where the products of a particular factory were sold’, and der Betriebspa meant, not so obviously the ‘general characteristics of a factory in regard to its technical and economic state’. The word das Kombinat, pl. -e, ‘a large concern in which different branches of industry or stages of production were united’ was used for even larger units, for example Fischkombinat, Eisenhüttenkombinat, Textilkombinat. If there were problems to be solved or disputes to be settled in industry then such new formations as die Konfliktkommission and der Besucherrat were among the words used for the bodies set up to deal with such matters. Agriculture too was organized in large units, die Genossenschaft, and the farmers who were members of these groups were called Genossenschaftsbauern. Since most agricultural and other kinds of land was once in private hands it had to be taken over by the state. This was known as die Bodenreform and the verb kollektivieren was used for this action of nationalizing the land. For the odd farmer or small firm which escaped collectivization the new formations der Einzelbauer, der Einzelbetrieb were used.

Since education was controlled by the state there were several new terms for new situations and persons, or for states which the government wished to emphasize, for example der Arbeiterstudent, a student who was a manual worker before starting to study. A student who goes to the university in his own town was called der Direktstudent. The word die Aspirantur was used for a ‘special course

to furnish scientists for the future’. Those people who wished to pursue a university course in their free time could do so via die Funkuniversität.

to furnish scientists for the future’. Those people who wished to pursue a university course in their free time could do so via die Funkuniversität.