Deutsch and Schwytzduetch

Bill H.   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 15:24 GMT
I appologize for the mangled spelling the Schwizerdeutsch but I had to sound it out. I got to participate in a work-abroad program in the summer of 1984 and chose CH,even though I knew the Swiss dialect was really almost unintelligable to most german speakers.

Well,it was a rude awakining at first,I called home and told my folks "I`m done for,they don`t even speak german!!" Written german was the same,of course,but the pronunciation and everything else was hard to follow. Luckily as a courtesy most people I came in contact with would revert to heavily accented "Schriftsdeutsch" when they detected my american accent. Little by little,however I began to understand, only parts and pieces but eventually,if I had known the person and they spoke their dialect I could fully understand what was being said! Crazy!! It would take a bit more work if I did`nt know the person. It was really bizarre to chit chat with the Swiss and see the Germans on holiday not following the dialect(but I did). Speaking Schweizerdeutsch was not recommened as nowbody could understand me. By the end of my summer intership I had picked up a heavy southern Swiss accent to my college german,all unconsciously. While in Berlin I was often mistaken for,not an Ami,but a Schweizer...now that was amazing!
Does anyone have any expearience with the Swiss and their dialects?
Thanks!
George   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 17:41 GMT
I've only been to Switzerland once and that was mostly to the touristy places, so I got by by speaking English. At the time I wasn't aware of the large differences between Schriftdeutsch and Schwyzertütsch, so I came armed with my "Conversational German for Beginners" guide, only to me intimidated from using it when I kept hearing words and phrases that didn't correspond with what my guide had taught me.

What's interesting is that although Swiss German is the spoken language of a the majority of Swiss, it's hardly ever written. Everything is written in High German, so the Swiss have developed an uncanny ability to read High German and simultaneously mentally transcribe the written text into their dialect of Swiss German when reading aloud. For instance, they'll see a word like "Dienstag" but they'll say it as "Züschtig", a written phrase like "Ich habe ein bisschen Kopfweh" might be read out loud as "Ich han es bitzeli Chopfweh". For someone who isn't fluent in other languages, I find this ability fascinating.

Do the multilinguists in this forum possess a similar ability to instantaneously translate something into another language as you read along or do you find that it takes you a few seconds as you think for a corresponding word?
Jacyra   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 17:44 GMT
Well it's like Brazilian Portuguese and Continental Portuguese. Continental Portuguese is almost unintelligable to most Brazilian speakers. Portuguese TV shows, movies etc are dubbed into Brazilian since no one understands them. We [formally/officially] write Portuguese but our spoken language is 100% Brazilian. So, between Swiss and German is the same distance we found between Brazilian and Portuguese.
Sander   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 17:47 GMT
That's bullshit Jacyra,Schwytserdutsch is higly influenced by french and Italian...and its a dialect like Brazillian portuguese,but the difference is MUCH MUCH MUCH bigger.
Jacyra   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 17:52 GMT
Brazilian is highly influenced by Tupi Guarani, Kimbundu, Yoruba, languages of immigrants and now American English. Native american languages changed Brazilian pronunciation and influence of African languages changed Brazilian grammar. Both of them influenced the lexic of Brazilian languages. So, Brazilian is much richer than Swiss German lexically.
Sander   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 17:53 GMT
On what do you base that?!
Bill H.   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 20:15 GMT
George you are right about how the Swiss dialect is in spoken form and the written remains standard german. It is like they preserved the written language but changed the pronunciation,etc. I guess it becomes second nature if you grow up doing it.

I did notice that many Swiss were uncomfortable with Hochdeutsch and either did`nt want to switch from the dialect to Deutsch or it was difficult for them. The average person on the street,however, did not seem to have a big problem using Schriftsdeutsch with me. Most german speaking Swiss are happy to help you with you Schweizerdeutsch if you are really interested and knowing the common unique swiss greetings,etc. usually leaves them with a smile.

The dialect(s) borrow or share some phrases,and word combonations from other languages i.e. you will find some french and italian mixed in with the Swiss german. Never really heard anyone speaking in Romansch(sp?) which is the 4th national language(was in `84). It is like the Swiss have the best of both worlds with their dialect and standard spelling.
Travis   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 20:46 GMT
Oh, puhleez, do not bring the whole "Brazilian" thing into it. And anyways, "Brazilian" *is* just a set of dialects of Portuguese, as much as you might like to believe otherwise, whether out of some kind of nationalism or dislike of Portugal or whatnot.
Bill H.   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:01 GMT

Travis you raise an interesting point about dialects. What are the parameters or criteria for a region`s speech being considered a dialect of a given language? I always had questions on how they determine that? If it is a measured change or variation from the standard language and how much differant can it get before it is considered it`s own language? Linguistics must have a way tracing how dialects form and evolve. Years ago I was under the impression that Dutch was a dialect of German,an offshoot that has its own spelling,grammer,etc. Do you think if a dialect is the national tongue of a soverign nation that it is considered a language? Guess I got off topic a bit.
Sander   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:03 GMT
(First of all,Dutch is not a German dialect)

And a wise man once said... "A language is a dialect with an army and a navy"
Bill H.   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:03 GMT
Oops. Forgot to add that I no longer consider Nederlands merely a dialect of Deutsch. Very similar and related,yes,but more differant than just a dialect.
Travis   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:29 GMT
I would say that the most important thing is crossintelligibility, but this is complicated by whether a language is part of a dialect continuum or not, and whether there exist multiple "standard" varieties in that continuum. Dialect continuums complicate things, because they make it hard to say where one language stops and another begins. You can have cases where one has a section dialect continuum in which there is not full crossintelligibility across it, yet said section is still considered by many to be a single language, due to having a single "standard" variety for its whole; a good example of such is the case of the Italian languages, of which "Italian" is the standard variety.

Multiple "standard" varieties within a continuum further complicate things, due to the complications associated with them socially (as they may often be considered separate languages by many, even if they do not fit a strict crossintelligibility-based definition of being separate languages). A good example of such a case is the continental North Germanic languages, of which there are *four* different standard varieties, standard Danish, Bokmål, Nynorsk, and standard Swedish, which are often called separate languages, even though one could easily call all of them a single language, especially if one ignores the more divergent dialect groups within the continuum in question, such as Jutish, many rural spoken forms of Norwegian, and Dalecarlian. Such "standard" varieties also often skew one's view of things, as if one's view of Norwegian is based primarily on Bokmål, one would likely think that what is called Norwegian is quite close to Danish; however, though, much of actual spoken Norwegian, especially that in rural areas, is quite different from the Bokmål that most Norwegians today write.

As for Dutch, things aren't that simple, as Dutch is within the "low" branch of the West Germanic languages, while standard Hochdeutsch is within the "high" branch of the West Germanic languages. Note that while standard Hochdeutsch is basically the sole "standard" variety within the "high" branch of the West Germanic languages, there are "high" West Germanic dialects which are not inherently crossintelligible with it, in particular Upper Bavarian and Upper Allemanic dialects, including Schwyzerdütsch. Note that the "low" West Germanic languages can be further split into "continental" and "North Sea" (or "insular") branches, the former being Low Saxon, Dutch, West Flemish, and Afrikaans, and the latter being English, Scots, West Frisian, East Frisian, and North Frisian.

Of the "low" West Germanic languages, the closest to standard Hochdeutsch are Low Saxon and Dutch, but neither of these are inherently crossintelligible with it, even though they may superficially seem like such to someone who doesn't speak them. But anyways, Dutch is not an offshoot of German per se, and is closer to Low Saxon, West Flemish, and Afrikaans than it is to it. If it did ever "split off from" German, it did so when the Second Germanic Sound Shift happened, which was in the early Common Era, as that clearly demarcated the separation between what would come to be called the "low" and "high" West Germanic dialects. However, though, it has some "Ingaevonic" features which German lacks, but are present (in greater degrees) in Low Saxon, English, Scots, and the Frisian languages. If anything, Dutch is less an offshoot of German that just happened to get its own standard variety than "Low Saxon with an army and a navy", but unlike what some may imply by calling Low Saxon "Low German", Low Saxon is a distinctly different language from (High) German.
Sander   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:32 GMT
"the former being Low Saxon, Dutch, WEST FLEMISH, and Afrikaans"


D'oh !!!!
Travis   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:35 GMT
Yes, you read that correctly alright - I did say "West Flemish" there, and I'm not going to take that back.
Sander   Saturday, May 28, 2005, 21:39 GMT
but why? /:(