Cover not available
Part of
Stability and Divergence in Language Contact: Factors and Mechanisms
Edited by Kurt Braunmüller, Steffen Höder and Karoline Kühl
[Studies in Language Variation 16] 2014
► pp. 39–60

Convergence vs. divergence from a diasystematic perspective

Convergence and divergence are usually defined as changes in opposite directions – convergence increases, divergence decreases interlingual similarities between two given languages or varieties. Additionally, convergence is often explained as the ‘natural’, expectable process in language contact, whereas divergence is associated with psychosocial mechanisms. Based on observations from the recent development of Low German in its present intense contact with High German, this contribution argues that the distinction between convergence and divergence is not as straightforward as it seems and that it is not convergence as such that can be explained without the involvement of any extralinguistic factors, but rather pro-diasystematic change (as opposed to counter-diasystematic change) – i.e. innovations that facilitate the establishment of language-unspecific structures in a common constructional system.
Published online: 26 November 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.16.03hod
References (32)
Aikhenvald, A.Y. 2007. Grammars in contact. A cross-linguistic perspective. In Grammars in Contact. A Cross-linguistic Typology [Explorations in linguistic typology 4], A.Y. ­Aikhenvald & R.M.W. Dixon (eds), 1–66. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Berg, K. 2013. Morphosyntax nominaler Einheiten im Niederdeutschen [Germanistische Bibliothek 49]. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Croft, W. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar. Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durrell, M. 2004. Linguistic variable – linguistic variant. In Sociolinguistics. An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society, Vol. 1, 2nd edn [Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 3.1], U. Ammon et al. (eds), 195–200. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Elmentaler, M. 2008. Varietätendynamik in Norddeutschland. Sociolinguistica 22: 66–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Modernes Niedersächsisch – Dialektwandel im nordniederdeutschen Raum. In Low Saxon Dialects Across Borders [Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik. Beihefte 138], A.N. Lenz, C. Gooskens & S. Reker (eds), 339–363. Stuttgart: Steiner.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A.E. 1995. Constructions. A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
. 2006. Constructions at Work. The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Grosjean, F. 2008. Studying Bilinguals. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hansen-Jaax, D. 1995. Transfer bei Diglossie. Synchrone Sprachkontaktphänomene im Niederdeutschen. Hamburg: Kovač.Google Scholar
Harnisch, R. 2010. Divergence of linguistic varieties in a language space. In Language and Space. An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, Vol. 1: Theories and Methods [Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 30.1], P. Auer & J.E. Schmidt (eds), 275–295. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Haugen, E. 1956. Bilingualism in the Americas. A Bibliography and Research Guide [Publications of the American Dialect Society 26]. [s. l.]: University of Alabama Press.Google Scholar
Heine, B. & Kuteva, T. 2005. Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge etc.: ­Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinskens, F., Auer, P., & Kerswill, P. 2005. The study of dialect convergence and divergence. Conceptual and methodological considerations. In Dialect Change. Convergence and Divergence in European Languages, P. Auer, F. Hinskens & P. Kerswill (eds), 1–48. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Höder, S. 2011. Niederdeutsch und Norddeutsch – ein Fall von Diasystematisierung. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 134: 113–136.Google Scholar
. 2012. Multilingual constructions: A diasystematic approach to common structures. In Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies [Hamburg studies on multilingualism 13], K. Braunmüller & C. Gabriel (eds), 241–257. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. Constructing diasystems: Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In The Sociolinguistics of Grammar [Studies in language companion series 154], T. Åfarli & B. Mæhlum (eds), 137–152. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. Forthcoming. Low German: A profile of a word language. In Syllable and Word Languages [Linguae & litterae 40], J. Caro Reina & R. Szczepaniak (eds). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter.
Hoffmann, T. & Trousdale, G. (eds). 2012. The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matras, Y. 2009. Language contact. Cambridge etc.: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mattheier, K.J. 1996. Varietätenkonvergenz: Überlegungen zu einem Baustein einer Theorie der Sprachvariation. Sociolinguistica 10: 31–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mensing, O. (ed.). 1927–1935. Schleswig-Holsteinisches Wörterbuch. Volksausgabe. Neumünster: Wachholtz.Google Scholar
Möller, F. 2008. Plattdeutsch im 21. Jahrhundert. Bestandsaufnahme und Perspektiven. Leer: Schuster.Google Scholar
Moulton, W.G. 1960. The short vowel systems of Northern Switzerland. A study in structural dialectology. Word 16: 155–182. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers-Scotton, C. 2002. Contact Linguistics. Bilingual Encounters and Grammatical Outcomes. Oxford etc.: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peterson, J. Forthcoming. Multilingualism, multilectalism and register variation in linguistic theory. Extending the diasystematic approach. In The Syntax-Semantics Interface [Studies in language and cognition], A. Latroite & R. Osswald (eds). Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf ­University Press.
Ross, M. 2007. Calquing and metatypy. Journal of Language Contact 1: 116–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schröder, I. 2012. ‘Da nicht für.’ Grammatische Kontaktphänomene Hochdeutsch-­Niederdeutsch. Sociolinguistica 26: 18–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schröder, I. & Elmentaler, M. 2009. Sprachvariation in Norddeutschland (SiN). Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 132: 41–68.Google Scholar
Schröder, I. & Vorberger, L. 2011. Standardadvergenz im nördlichen Niedersachsen? Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 134: 137–147.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. 1954. Is a structural dialectology possible? Word 10: 388–400. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1964 [1953]. Languages in Contact. Findings and Problems, 3rd edn. London etc.: Mouton.Google Scholar
Cited by (9)

Cited by nine other publications

Barking, Marie, Maria Mos & Ad Backus
2024. Individual variation in contact effects – stability, convergence, and divergence. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism DOI logo
Hendrikx, Isa & Kristel Van Goethem
2024. Dutch compound constructions in additional language acquisition. Constructions and Frames 16:1 ► pp. 64 ff. DOI logo
Bianconi, Michele & Robin Meyer
2023. Contact‐Induced Changes in Morphosyntax: An Introduction. Transactions of the Philological Society 121:3 ► pp. 331 ff. DOI logo
Hennecke, Inga & Evelyn Wiesinger
2023. Language contact phenomena in multiword units: The code-switching–calquing continuum. International Journal of Bilingualism DOI logo
Meyer, Robin
2023. Iranian Syntax in Classical Armenian, DOI logo
Urban, Aileen
2021. Idioconstructions in conflict. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Van Goethem, Kristel & Isa Hendrikx
2021. Intensifying constructions in second language acquisition. In Constructions in Contact 2 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 30], ► pp. 375 ff. DOI logo
Höder, Steffen
2014. Phonological elements and Diasystematic Construction Grammar. Constructions and Frames 6:2 ► pp. 202 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2024. Intonation in Language Contact [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today, 286], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 28 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.