Insociolinguistics, anabstand language is alanguage variety or cluster of varieties with significantlinguistic distance from all others, while anausbau language is astandard variety, possibly with relateddependent varieties.Heinz Kloss introduced these terms in 1952 to denote two separate and largely independent sets of criteria for recognizing a "language":[1]
This framework addresses situations in which multiple varieties from adialect continuum have been standardized, so that they are commonly considered distinct languages even though they may bemutually intelligible. The continentalScandinavian languages offer a commonly cited example of this situation. One of the applications of this theoretical framework is language standardization (examples since the 1960s includingBasque andRomansh).
Abstandsprache means "language by virtue of linguistic distance". Kloss suggested the English translation "language by distance", referring to linguistic differences rather than geographical separation.[1]Abstand means a distance of ongoing separation, e.g. a clearance by mechanical design. In the context of language varieties,abstand indicates the discontinuity of two dialects; in the words of Kloss, there is a "definite break" between the varieties.[2]
Anabstand language is a cluster of varieties that is distinctly separate from any other language. European examples includeBasque andBreton.[2] Kloss also spoke of degrees ofabstand between pairs of varieties.[3] He did not specify how the differences between two varieties would be measured, assuming that linguists would apply objective criteria.[2] A standard linguistic criterion ismutual intelligibility, though this does not always produce consistent results, for example when applied to adialect continuum.[4]
Anabstand language does not need to have a standard form. This is often the case with minority languages used within a larger state, where the minority language is used only in private, and all official functions are performed in the majority language.
The German verbausbauen (pronounced[ˈaʊ̯sˌbaʊ̯ən]ⓘ, literally "to build out") expresses core meanings of "expanding" something or "developing something to completion", e.g. adding to an existing structure. (Croatian linguistŽarko Muljačić [hr] translatedAusbausprache into French aslangue par élaboration.)[5] Kloss suggested the English translation "language by development", referring to the development of astandard variety from part of adialect continuum:[1]
Languages belonging in this category are recognized as such because of having been shaped or reshaped, molded or remolded—as the case may be—in order to become a standardized tool of literary expression.
Kloss identified several stages of this development, beginning with use of the variety for humour orfolklore, followed by lyrics and then narrative prose. The next phase, which he considered crucial, was use of the variety for serious non-fiction. From this point, the variety could be further developed for use in technical, scientific or government domains.[6]
A standard variety developed in this way can be mutually intelligible with other standard varieties. A commonly cited example occurs in theScandinavian dialect continuum spanning Norway, Sweden and Denmark. The three standardized languagesNorwegian,Swedish andDanish (or four if NorwegianBokmål andNynorsk are distinguished) are mutually distinctausbau languages, even though speakers of the different standards can, to varying degrees, readily understand one another.
This classification invokes the criterion of social and political functions of language use. The sociolinguistPeter Trudgill has linked Kloss's theoretical framework withEinar Haugen's framework ofautonomy and heteronomy, with the statement that a variety is anausbau language corresponding to the statement that it is used "autonomously" with respect to other related languages.[7] Such a language has an independent cultural status, even though it may be mutually intelligible with otherausbau languages from the same continuum.[8] This typically means that it has its own standardized form independent of neighbouring standard languages, it is typically taught in schools, and it is used as a written language in a wide variety of social and political functions, possibly including that of an official national language. In contrast, varieties that are notausbau languages are typically only spoken and typically only used in private contexts. Trudgill expands the definition to include related varieties:[8]
[A]n Ausbau language is an autonomous standardized variety together with all the nonstandard dialects from that part of the dialect continuum which are heteronomous with respect to it i.e. dependent on it.
An Ausbau language is defined by social criteria, and hence tend to treat languages as social constructs that can be identified only through its social status and usage. However, the coexistence of abstand and ausbau languages lead to two opposing sets of criteria over the status of nonstandard varieties. For example, various varieties of German and Italian are considered dialects according to Ausbau criteria, although they are linguistically distant from the standard languages.[9]
Kloss described anausbau language as providing a "roof" (German:Dach) over dependent varieties, whereasnon-standard varieties without a reference standard were "roofless dialects".[10] He used the term "near-dialectized sister languages" for varieties roofed by a standard variety with which they are related but not mutually intelligible, such asLow Saxon (roofed byStandard German),Occitan andHaitian Creole (roofed byFrench), andSardinian (roofed byItalian).[11] A later development is the notion of multiple,pluricentric standards within the same language; for German not one but at least three roofs are offered:Standard German German,Standard Austrian German andStandard Swiss German.[12] These newer conceptualizations, however, may be restricted by "One Standard Axioms",[13] which uphold presuppositions of a single standard, a single "Dach", that exert hegemonic power e.g. the "One Standard German Axiom" (OSGA).[14]
Muljačić introduced the termDachsprache, or "roofing language", for a dialect that serves as astandard language for other dialects.[15] These dialects would usually be in adialect continuum, but may be so different that mutual intelligibility is not possible between all dialects, particularly those separated by significant geographical distance. The roofing language may also cover linguistic varieties that are not mutually intelligible with the roofing language, such as in the case of Standard German.[16] In order to resolve the difficulty of partitioning a dialect continuum, Goossens as well as Chambers and Trudgill argue that all nonstandard varieties that are under the roofing language should be considered part of the same language as the roofing language.[17] In 1982, "Rumantsch Grischun" was developed byHeinrich Schmid as such aDachsprache for a number of quite differentRomansh language forms spoken in parts ofSwitzerland.[citation needed] Similarly,Standard Basque and theSouthern Quechua literary standard were both developed as standard languages for dialect continua that had historically been thought of as discrete languages with many dialects and no "official" dialect.[citation needed]Standard German andItalian, to some extent, function in the same way. Perhaps the most widely usedDachsprache isModern Standard Arabic, which links together the speakers of many different, often mutually unintelligiblevarieties of Arabic.
The Dachsprache functions together with dialects to form a linguistic diasystem, which consists of different linguistic systems that coexist and mutually influence. Within the diasystem, the Dachsprache functions as the standard for interdialectal communication, for example, with Standard Chinese assisting communication between different dialects and influencing their vocabulary.[18]
Kloss recognized three degrees of separation between ausbau languages.[19]
When two standards are based on identical or near-identical dialects, he considered them as splits of the same standard into two or more, constituting apluricentric language. Examples includeBritish andAmerican Standard English,Standard Austrian German andGerman Standard German,[20] or European and Brazilian variants ofPortuguese.[19]High Hindi andUrdu also have a common dialect basis (Hindustani).[21] The same is the case with Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian and Montenegrin,[22][23] which also have the same dialect basis (Shtokavian),[24] andconsequently constitute four standard variants of thepluricentric Serbo-Croatian language.[25][26][27][28][29]
Standards created from different dialects, but with littleabstand, would not be considered separate abstand languages, but constitute distinct ausbau languages, as noted above forDanish,Swedish andNorwegian.[19] The concept ofausbau is particularly important in cases where the local spoken varieties across a larger region form a dialect continuum. In such cases, the question of where the one language ends and the other starts is often a question more ofausbau than ofabstand. In some instances,ausbau languages have been created out of dialects for purposes ofnation-building. This applies, for instance, toLuxembourgishvis-a-vis German (the vernaculars in Luxembourg are varieties ofMoselle Franconian, which is also spoken in the German sections of theMoselle River valley and neighbouring French département ofMoselle). Other examples of groups of vernaculars lackingabstand internally but that have given rise to multipleausbau languages are:Persian of Iran, Afghanistan and Tajikistan (cf.Farsi,Dari,Tajik);Bulgarian andMacedonian, because they have different dialect bases.
Finally, theausbau languages may be so different that they also constituteabstand languages. Examples includeDutch versusGerman,Persian versusPashto, andTamil versusTelugu.[19]
In the former two cases, scholars do not always agree on the best classification, as they always partake, inadvertently, in the "language making" and "language unmaking" process.[30] The concept of aOne Standard German Axiom in that language is a case in point that illustrates the contested nature of the first two types of ausbau languages and occasionally also the third, varying with the degree with which sociolinguistic processes are assigned relevance in a particular approach.
There are several instances of languages and language pairs that have undergone role changes over time.Low German, for instance, was both an Ausbau language and a roof of local dialects in theNetherlands,Germany and parts of theBaltic states and their formerly German vicinity. With the end of theHanseatic League, Low German lost its status as an official language to a large degree. Approximately at the same time, Dutch started to replace Low German as a roof of the Low German dialects in the Netherlands that form today'sDutch Low Saxon group, and most Central German dialects went under the "roof" of the evolvingHigh German.[31] Low German ceased to be spoken on the eastern rim of the Baltic Sea. Today, its dialects surviving in northern Germany have come under the roof ofStandard German.[32] Local Low German dialects spoken in the Netherlands have come under the roof of Dutch.[31] This happened despite the effect of notable migration streams in both directions between the Western (Dutch) and Eastern (Prussian, now mainly Polish and Russian) areas of the region of the Low German languages, motivated by both religious intolerance and labour need. In several spots along the Dutch–German border, identical dialects are spoken on both sides, but are deemed to belong to different roofing according to which side of the border they are on.[33]
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)The debate about the status of the Serbo-Croatian language and its varieties has recently shifted (again) towards a position which looks at the internal variation within Serbo-Croatian through the prism of linguistic pluricentricity
Obwohl das Kroatische sich in den letzten Jahren in einigen Gebieten, vor allem jedoch auf lexikalischer Ebene, verändert hat, sind diese Änderungen noch nicht bedeutend genug, dass der Terminus Ausbausprache gerechtfertigt wäre. Ausserdem können sich Serben, Kroaten, Bosnier und Montenegriner immer noch auf ihren jeweiligen Nationalsprachen unterhalten und problemlos verständigen. Nur schon diese Tatsache zeigt, dass es sich immer noch um eine polyzentrische Sprache mit verschiedenen Varietäten handelt.
{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)The following article contains useful definitions: