CLARIFICATION NORMS OF MIDDLE HIGH GERMAN LANGUAGE

  • L. V. POLLBERG
Keywords: upper limit of norm, lower limit of norm, syntax, morphology, composition type

Abstract

The article studies the witness norms of the grammatical system. We examine the upper and lower limits of language norm. An upper limit is quantitative, and lower – structural. The analysis is conducted in this paper accounting the morphological and syntactic peculiarities of Middle High German language. The language standard consists of two lists: mandatory and valid. In such a dynamic aspect, it is a socio-historical result of linguistic and communicative activity, which is enshrined in the traditional implementation of the system for the creation of new linguistic facts. From this point of view, the system of norms is understood by the author as an organized process that is implemented through the capabilities of the language system. Such an organization has several scales that match the categories of variability and complement them based on gender or age differences. In such a dynamic aspect, it is a socio-historical result of linguistic and communicative activity, which is enshrined in the traditional implementation of the system for the creation of new linguistic facts.

This article discusses the relationship between norms, their intersection and mutual effects based on the material of the norms of Middle High German language. Linguistic expressions are examined in the research, first of all, from their formal side, from the standpoint of the codified norm of literary language. At the same time the composition of this norm and its changes are stated. The period under consideration is characterized by the gradual establishing of norms. Considerations of functional types of communication and types of communicative situations are described in the paper by stylistic norms which in its turn leads to the limitation of functional styles as normative points for evaluating the linguistic expressions of certain areas of communication. The expanding of the vocabulary is caused by the formation of composites and morphological variations of words.

References

1. Левицкий Ю. А. Лингвистика текста. Москва : Высшая школа, 2005. 205 с.
2. Baumgärtner K. Zur Syntax der Umgangssprache. Berlin : Wissenschaftsverlag, 1989. 129 S.
3. Behagel O. Deutsche Syntax. Heidelberg : Quelle & Meyer Verlag, 1986. 234 S.
4. Bühler K. Sprachtheorie. Jena : H. Popitz, 1998. 431 S.
5. Coseriu E. Einführung in die Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft. Tübingen : A. Francke Verlag GmbH, 1988. 329 S.
6. Funke O. Die innere Sprachform. Reichenberg : v. Otto, 1924. 417 S.
7. Glinz H. Die innere Form des Deutschen. Bern : Buchgesellschaft, 2001. 321 S.
8. Havers W. Handbuch der erklärenden Syntax. Heidelberg : Schulze Verlag, 1989. 342 S.
9. Lions J. Einführung in die moderne Linguistik. Stuttgart : Gurt E. Schwab Verlag, 1961. 239 S.
10. Mayer F. Schöpferische Sprache und Rhythmus. Berlin : Erich Schmidt Verlag, 1959. 354 S.
11. Otto E. Stand und Aufgaben der allgemeinen Sprachwissenschaft. Berlin : Akademie Verlag, 1987. 289 S.
12. Techtmeier B. Typologie der Norm. Tübingen : Gunter Narr Verlag, 1999. 194 S.
Published
2019-12-25
How to Cite
POLLBERG, L. V. (2019). CLARIFICATION NORMS OF MIDDLE HIGH GERMAN LANGUAGE. New Philology, (78), 55-60. Retrieved from http://www.novafilolohiia.zp.ua/index.php/new-philology/article/view/36
Section
Articles