Artikel + Name

  • Kajjo

    Senior Member
    I perceive it the same way. Irgendwie familiärer.
    And that's why I see a connection to dialect; the same argument is used. For me it still feels connected to the "homely dialectal background" and using dialectal words and phrases to feel at home or closer to a peer group.

    For standard speakers I can reassure you that there is no "warm" connection at all. Not at all. It just sounds so bad and wrong to me.
     

    elroy

    Imperfect mod
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    For standard speakers I can reassure you that there is no "warm" connection at all. Not at all.
    I don’t think that’s true. @Sowka, for example, is just as much a “standard speaker” as you, and I don’t think she would agree with your perception.
    It just sounds so bad and wrong to me.
    To you, yes. I don’t think everyone who speaks your variety of German would necessarily agree.
     

    Kajjo

    Senior Member
    To you, yes. I don’t think everyone who speaks your variety of German would necessarily agree.
    Well, certainly not everyone would agree, but many.

    Yesterday, I spoke with a linguist from Cologne who used to live in Hamburg for a few years and she told me, she has never been corrected (as native!) so much as in Hamburg when she used an article with a name. So many people felt the need to even correct a native! Very many people object to this article. For us, it is either dialectal (and somehow forgiven with an inner shake of the head) or feels pejorative (and is reacted to).

    Further, a related topic (though somehow separate) is the correlation between lack of education and sub-standard use of articles in front of company names, e.g. "zum Aldi". This only happens in our region with lower class people. I can just guess, that this somehow exacerbates our feelings to articles in front of first names.

    Anyway, we reached an agreement on standard usage (without) and colloquial-regional usage (Southern with). Obviously, each region prefers their way. No surprise there, isn't it? This "warmer feeling" is most likely connected to dialectal homeliness.
     

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    The warm feeling of dialectal regions had been discussed in many posts and other threads before.
    With the same justification, even more given the relative sizes of the regions, it can be called "dialekt influence" on your part that you don't feel it. "Umgangssprache" is never fully non-regional (as is Standardsprache but to a lesser degree) but that is different from "Dialekt". This particular usage is not linked to any dialect boundary but is cuts through dialect regions.

    Applying Standardsprache rules where Umgangssprache rules require a different wording naturally sounds "cooler". This, again, has nothing to do with any dialect but is purely a related to the choice of register.

    This is key:
    I don’t think that’s true. @Sowka, for example, is just as much a “standard speaker” as you, and I don’t think she would agree with your perception.
    And this makes your claim bordering insolence (which I am absolutely sure has never been your intention) and causes these strong reactions.

    The rules of standard language are irrelevant to this issue as we all agree that this phenomenon affects only Umgangssprache and that speakers who use it in Umgangssprache respect the different rules of the registers.
     
    Last edited:

    Kajjo

    Senior Member
    This particular usage is not linked to any dialect boundary but is cuts through dialect regions.
    What has still not been cleared up is whether all these different dialects use the article when spoken in full dialect. If yes, that would support my hypothesis of an dialectal influence, even if many different dialects are involved.

    Does anyone know that? Verwenden Sächsisch, Bairisch, Schwäbisch, Kölsch den Artikel vor Vornamen?
     

    elroy

    Imperfect mod
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    Verwenden Sächsisch, Bairisch, Schwäbisch, Kölsch den Artikel vor Vornamen?
    I don't think that matters. Dieses Phänomen hat sich über Dialektsprecher hinaus durchgesetzt. Even if it were etymologically related to dialectal features, that would be of little relevance to modern usage, since many people who use this form don't speak or are not proficient in a dialect.
     

    Sowka

    Forera und Moderatorin
    German, Northern Germany
    The warm feeling of dialectal regions had been discussed in many posts and other threads before. So you are not alone with this feeling. When people are used to the article, they somehow feel it as warmer.
    In my post, I tried to explain that for me, this is rather a shared sociolect, not a dialect.
    And thinking about the sentence "Ich bin die Ingrid", I think indeed that I associate it most with women (even without considering the article and the name ;)), with certain professions, such as teaching and social care, and with (my) political groups which are a little more to the left of the spectrum. However, this is just my perception, from me with my experience mainly in Hannover, and in the groups that I have participated in.


    Edit: "Shared" added because this is why it feels so "warm" to me. :)
     
    Last edited:

    Kajjo

    Senior Member
    since many people who use this form don't speak or are not proficient in a dialect.
    But dialectal influence does not require speaking the dialect yourself. For example, a lot of the stronger Bavarian accent is related to the Bavarian dialect even if the speaker himself does not speak the full dialect. Such features just stay in the region and their accent and wording features.
     

    elroy

    Imperfect mod
    US English, Palestinian Arabic bilingual
    My point is that this form is used by many speakers who are not any more or any less influenced by a dialect than you are. I'm afraid that reducing this to "no article = standard; article = dialectal(ly) influenced" is an over-simplification.

    To make a parallel, there are many English words and expressions, like "I feel you," "straight up," and "on fleek," that originated in African-American Vernacular English (AAVE) but are now part of general American English and are used by many speakers who are not at all influenced by AAVE. (In fact, the only one of the three examples I gave that before writing this post I knew had its origins in AAVE was "I feel you." I had no idea the other two did, too, until I searched for other examples!)
     
    Last edited:

    berndf

    Moderator
    German (Germany)
    What has still not been cleared up is whether all these different dialects use the article when spoken in full dialect. If yes, that would support my hypothesis of an dialectal influence, even if many different dialects are involved.

    Does anyone know that? Verwenden Sächsisch, Bairisch, Schwäbisch, Kölsch den Artikel vor Vornamen?
    Das haben wir, dachte ich, schon geklärt. Die regelmäßige Nichtverwendung des Artikels vor Vornamen in Umgangssprache (egal ob dialektnah oder nicht) ist auf ein Gebiet in etwa nörlich einer Linie Hannover-Osnabrück beschränkt. In allen anderen Regionen ist die Verwendung ses Artikels vor Vornamen in umgangssprachlichen Sprechsituationen normal. Die Frage ist höchstens, in welchen Dialekten und/oder Regionen diese Verwendung obligatorisch ist. Ich würde sagen obligatorisch ist es tatsächlich nur in dialektaler oder dialektnaher Sprache im oberdeutschen Sprachraum und in einigen fränkischen Dialekten. Aber auch wo es nicht obligatorisch ist, wirkt das Weglassen des Artikels "bookish" und klingt in umgangssprachlichen Sprechsituationen darum (zumindest leicht) merkwürdig.
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    Further, a related topic (though somehow separate) is the correlation between lack of education and sub-standard use of articles in front of company names, e.g. "zum Aldi". This only happens in our region with lower class people. I can just guess, that this somehow exacerbates our feelings to articles in front of first names.
    So it is not dialectal usage (in a stricter sense) but sociolect. In a full linguistic sense also the standard language is dialect (Mundart). We did not use this here. We used the weaker sense: no standard language and not just coll. language. And not just regionalisms. Dialect has own vocabulary, own sound system, own grammar, sometimes an own writing system.

    For me there is not much difference between the status of lower class language and "Educated people" language.
    We do not have different languages but some different usage of the same language.

    It is the My fair lady principle I reject. "Die Sprache macht den Menschen".
    Substandard is not bad standard but it is not formally standardizes. It is just standardized by usage.

    By the way: in other areas "sub" means "part of", for example sub set. But it is wrong in sociolects, not in German.
    Standard language is a restricted language with sharper definitions.

    As far as I understand it: Also in the North it is used. But usually from lower class people. Is this correct?

    And it is an antagonism between two sociolects in your area. One is a subset of standard language+regionalisms the other one is a special coll. language.

    ---
    I say zu REWE but zum ALDI. -- I think not because of grammar but sound. Grammar allows both. Or it is short "Zum Aldi(laden)"
     

    Hutschi

    Senior Member
    But dialectal influence does not require speaking the dialect yourself. For example, a lot of the stronger Bavarian accent is related to the Bavarian dialect even if the speaker himself does not speak the full dialect. Such features just stay in the region and their accent and wording features.
    :tick:

    That is why not using something is also dialectal or regional influence.
     
    Top