Alsatian Acts Of Identity: Language Use and Language Attitude (Multilingual Matters, 90)

cover

title: author: publisher: isbn10 | asin: print isbn13: ebook isbn13: language: subject

publication date: lcc: ddc: subject:

next page >

Alsatian Acts of Identity : Language Use and Language Attitudes in Alsace Multilingual Matters (Series) ; 90 Vassberg, Liliane M. Multilingual Matters 1853591734 9781853591730 9780585125930 English Sociolinguistics--France--Alsace, German language-Dialects--France--Alsace, German language--Social aspects--France--Alsace, Ethnicity--France--Alsace, Alsace (France)--History. 1993 P115.5.F8V37 1993eb 306.4/4/0944383 Sociolinguistics--France--Alsace, German language-Dialects--France--Alsace, German language--Social aspects--France--Alsace, Ethnicity--France--Alsace, Alsace (France)--History.

cover

next page >

< previous page

page_iii

next page > Page iii

MULTILINGUAL MATTERS 90 Series Editor: Derrick Sharp

Alsatian Acts of Identity Language Use and Language Attitudes in Alsace Liliane M. Vassberg MULTILINGUAL MATTERS LTD Clevedon Philadelphia Adelaide

< previous page

page_iii

next page >

< previous page

page_iv

next page > Page iv

To David, Mark and Alan Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Vassberg, Liliane M. (Liliane Mangold), 1943Alsatian Acts of Identity: Language Use and Language Attitudes in Alsace/ Liliane M. Vassberg. p. cm. (Multilingual Matters: 90) Includes bibliographical references. 1. Sociolinguistics-France-Alsace. 2. German language-Dialects-France-Alsace. 3. German language-Social aspects-France-Alsace. 4. Ethnicity-France-Alsace. 5. Alsace (France) History. I. Title. II. Series: Multilingual Matters (Series): 90 P115.5.F8V37 1993 306.4'4'0944383-dc20. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN 1-85359-173-4 (hbk) ISBN 1-85359-172-6 (pbk) Multilingual Matters Ltd UK: Frankfurt Lodge, Clevedon Hall, Victoria Road, Clevedon, Avon BS21 7SJ. USA: 1900 Frost Road, Suite 101, Bristol, PA 19007, USA. Australia: P.O. Box 6025, 83 Gilles Street, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia. Copyright © 1993 Liliane M. Vassberg. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. Printed and bound in Great Britain by the Longdunn Press, Bristol.

< previous page

page_iv

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_v

Page v Contents Introduction

1

1 The Geography, Dialect and History of Alsace

7

2 Review of Previous Studies

28

3 Language Choice and Code Switching in Alsace

61

4 Analysis of Conversations

71

5 Language Use in Southern Alsace

101

6 Attitudes Towards Languages in Southern Alsace

146

Conclusion

172

Appendix A: Sample of Student Questionnaire

182

Appendix B: Sample of Adult Questionnaire

188

Bibliography of Works Cited

195

Index

202

< previous page

page_v

next page >

< previous page

page_1

next page > Page 1

Introduction Alsace is a French province, yet it has a distinctly Germanic identity, resulting from geographic, historical and linguistic factors. The Rhine Valley is and always has been a crossroad for different cultures. Alsace's median location between major European cultures and powers has shaped its history, exposing it again and again to foreign influences and to covetous neighbors. The Celts, the Romans, and various Germanic tribes have passed through or settled here. In the modern era there has been easy and direct contact with German politics, trade and culture. After the rise of nationalism in Europe, Alsace was, in Hessini's (1981: 11) words, 'disputed, coveted, [and] shuffled back and forth' by Germany and France. Between 1870 and 1945, Alsace changed hands four times. After each conquest and reconquest, the victorious state tried to impose its laws, its customs, and its language. These repeated political changes have resulted in a uniquely complex linguistic situation. In Alsace, a German dialect has been spoken for 15 centuries. In 1918 about 90% of the population still used the dialect in everyday situations. But since the end of World War II (in 1945), the Alsatian dialect has rapidly and dramatically lost ground to French because of the social, economic and political dominance of the national language. French is the official prestige language used in administrative offices, in schools and universities, in the courts, in business, and in the news media. The dialect is likely to be spoken in family circles, among friends, in cafes, in some factory workshops, and in senior citizens' clubs. The standard written and cultivated form of the dialect is Hochdeutsch (High German), but the latter is hardly ever spoken among Alsatians. The vast majority of speakers of Alsatian today are also speakers of French. The older bilinguals are often Alsatian dominant, while the younger ones may feel more at home in French. Furthermore, existing studies point to an erosion of the functional distribution of Alsatian and French, which seemed clearer in the past. French is slowly gaining in the traditional strongholds of the dialect, such as within the family. Since the late 1960s, some Alsatians have joined other minorities in

< previous page

page_1

next page >

< previous page

page_2

next page > Page 2

France (such as the Bretons, the Basques, the Provençaux, the Flemish, and the Catalans) in voicing concern over the survival of their dialects, and actively promoting dialect maintenance. Pessimists argue that the overwhelming influence of a prestigious language like French leaves the dialect dim prospects of survival (Olsen, 1974; Philipps, 1975, 1978, 1982; Ladin, 1982; Tabouret-Keller & Luckel, 1981; Denis, 1985; Denis & Veltman, 1989). Some government surveys, however, seem to contradict the alarm or pessimism expressed in the above-mentioned studies: a 1979 INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques) census shows that about 75% of the Alsatian population still speaks the dialect. Indeed, in comparison with other minority languages in France, Alsace has the highest percentage of dialect speakers (Neville, 1987). Perhaps this explains why the preservation of the dialect has not been perceived as an issue by the population at large. The French government has recently reversed its traditionally antagonistic and intransigent attitude towards minority languages in France, by allowing the teaching of regional languages in schools, and also encouraging classes on regional culture. Courses in the Alsatian language are offered at the Université Populaire in Mulhouse and in other higher learning institutions of Alsace. And secondary school students can now elect to take an option langue et culture régionales at the baccalauréat exam. The impact of these policies still remains to be analyzed and assessed. Grace Neville (1987: 157) points out that regional languages are no longer perceived as a threat to French identity, but that instead English is viewed as a new threat which has prompted the creation of government-backed organizations such as the Institut National de la Langue Française, l'Office du Vocabulaire Français, and the Haut Comité pour la Défense et l'Expansion de la langue Française. The French government's changing attitude is also partly a response to demands for decentralization, and growing interest for regional particularism, including linguistic particularism. The general public's growing interest for Alsatian particularism is reflected in well-stocked Alsatique shelves in urban bookstores, which offer not only the usual works on aspects of Alsatian culture, but also ever-increasing numbers of Alsatian grammars and Alsatian language textbooks. Hessini (1981: 95) mentions an 'explosion of literary activity' in Alsatian, which indicates a 'new trend'. Already in 1975, Marc Hug (1975: 113) noted that the Alsatian dialect was again fashionable in some upper-middle-class circles. Currently, some of the most militant dialect activists

< previous page

page_2

next page >

< previous page

page_3

next page > Page 3

can be found among young urban Alsatians, who never experienced the Nazi occupation and the subsequent suspicions attached to speaking a German dialect. These young people, while often very Frenchified, feel a sense of urgency about the erosion of the dialect (Hessini, 1981: 25). Letters to the editor of the major newspapers of the area, such as L'Alsace or the Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace, also attest to a continuing concern of some of the readers for the pros and cons of supporting the dialect, versus full assimilation to French. From week to week, the reader can follow the lively dialogue of arguments and counter arguments. More television and radio time is devoted to programs in Alsatian, and seemingly, the appeal of these programs is growing (L'Alsace, July 25, 1987). Interest in Alsatian theater is high. And my own conversations with large numbers of Alsatians, both young and old, show that most hold positive attitudes towards the dialect. All the developments mentioned above add up to a situation characterized by intense flux and uncertainty about the relative position and the future role of the dialect and French in the Alsatian linguistic repertoire. Existing studies offer a picture that is by no means clear. They are relatively few in number, of uneven quality, and no comprehensive study exists for all of Alsace, except for a recently completed linguistic atlas (Beyer & Matzen, 1969; Bothorel-Witz, Philipp & Spindler, 1984), and a study by Denis & Veltman (1989). Furthermore, much of the available literature is written by spokespersons for different groups with varying ideologies, and there is a need for more rigorously conducted and more impartial studies. The present study focuses on the sociolinguistic aspects of language contact and bilingualism in Alsace. Whereas the majority of existing studies have investigated the northern half of the region reputedly the more linguistically conservative one my study was carried out in the southern half of Alsace, in the Mulhouse area. The objectives of this study were to describe, and analyze the following: present-day language use/choice in the Mulhouse area; samples of in-situ language use, exemplifying the linguistic repertoire of the Mulhouse community; the correlation between language choice and speaker variables such as age, sex, educational background, place of dwelling, and domain; the correlation between attitudes towards French and Alsatian and language choice; and the pertinence of Le Page's (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985) 'acts of identity' theory for explaining language change in Alsace. The findings of the study shed new light on our understanding of the Alsatian situation. Moreover, they provide additional information

< previous page

page_3

next page >

< previous page

page_4

next page > Page 4

concerning the factors that shape language change in language contact situations in general, and in particular where a minority language is in contact with a prestige variety. Another question of interest here is the relationship between linguistic behavior and social identity. At a time when many linguistic minorities in the world including in the United States are asserting themselves and demanding linguistic equality, understanding the processes of language choice and language change is not only useful, but necessary for policy making and language planning purposes. With few exceptions, studies published in French and English describing the language situation in Alsace are 'macro' studies, which analyze language use in relation to domain, urbanization, immigration, industrialization, or to other variables such as age or sex. While such studies have been very useful in revealing patterns of language use and in ascertaining a marked shift towards French, they also obscure certain facts about the individual speaker. Large-scale surveys reveal shared community norms of linguistic behavior, but only studies focussing on individual users show how the knowledge of norms is used to achieve particular effects. 'Macro' studies reflect only one side of the coin. They should be supplemented by descriptions of everyday language use at the micro level. Consequently, this study is an attempt at integrating fieldwork and survey methods. The data analyzed include: answers to questionnaires on language attitudes and language use; audio tapes of natural conversations between Alsatians, and tapes of interviews of Alsatian bilinguals; notes taken during and after participant-observation; previous studies and findings; and historical surveys of the area. The assumption is that 'data from a variety of distinct sources and methods, properly interpreted, can be used to converge on right answers to hard questions' (Labov, 1972: 119). Another assumption underlying this work is that linguistic change is first and foremost a social phenomenon, that has its source in synchronic heterogeneity in the speech community. Le Page & Tabouret-Keller's (1985) hypothesis of 'acts of identity' provides a theoretical framework from which to assess the process of emergence and disintegration of identities and the resulting language shift or language maintenance. In particular, they view language behavior as a 'series of acts of identity in which people reveal both their personal identity and their search for social roles,' by creating linguistic patterns 'so as to resemble those of the group or groups with which, from time to time, they wish to be identified' (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985: 14 and 18). They further suggest that positive or negative motivation to identify with groups is 'by far the most important of the constraints for linguistic behavior' (p. 184). Thus, they

< previous page

page_4

next page >

< previous page

page_5

next page > Page 5

stress the necessity of examining 'history, the sociolinguistic observation and the recording of people's attitudes towards and about language and ethnicity' concurrently, in order to understand identity processes and linguistic choice/use (p. 4). In this they agree with Dell Hymes (1976: 96), who calls for examining motivation and values in linguistic behavior and with Dietrich Strauss (1981: 4), who also emphasizes the essential role of historical background to any given ethnopolitical and sociolinguistic group. Hence the importance of the history of Alsace in informing Alsatian linguistic behavior. This study is also committed to the idea that it is through everyday discourse that social roles are sustained and recognized, i.e. acts of identity are made, and that sociolinguistic studies also need to consider how people actually talk. Consequently, a discourse analysis approach was adopted to analyze the transcripts of natural conversation. My study is empirical in that it deals with real language use, and ethnographic in that it is concerned with both cultural norms and assumptions, and also with the immediate and emerging context of speech events. The bilingual situation in Alsace shares many features with other areas of Europe (and the rest of the world) where lesser-used languages are spoken, yet the Alsatian case is not generally well known. A possible reason is that unlike the Basques and the Catalans in Spain, or the Bretons and the Corsicans in France, language activists and language promotion groups in Alsace have used relatively calm, non-violent and non-spectacular tactics that have not attracted much attention, especially in the news media. Another possible reason for the lack of attention to Alsace among studies of linguistic minorities is the question of whether the Alsatian dialect really qualifies as an endangered language, since, even if it were to disappear in Alsace, varieties of Alemannic would continue to be spoken in Germany and Switzerland. The term 'minority' which I have adopted for this study is admittedly ambiguous. As used here, 'minority language' has nothing to do with the language itself, and in no way conveys the idea that somehow the minority language is deficient or inferior. Rather it refers to the situation it finds itself in. For instance, Danish is the threatening language for Faroese, but it is itself a minority language in Germany. Minority languages usually live in the shadow of a culturally dominant language. Nor does 'minority group' refer to sheer numbers. In Belgium, the Flemish who have been perceived as a minority actually form 60% of the population. Likewise, in Alsace, Alsatian speakers comprise the majority of the population. Again, the term primarily reflects the fact that the language of the minority group

< previous page

page_5

next page >

< previous page

page_6

next page > Page 6

has usually been neglected, disdained, or discouraged. Minority speakers are not necessarily economically disadvantaged, as is often the case among US minorities, for instance. My study is limited by various factors such as small geographical area considered, relatively small number of respondents, and inherent weaknesses of the questionnaire approach. My conclusions, therefore, are cautious and tentative, although survey methodology has been corroborated by data collected using participant observation in the studies of Gal (1979) in Austria, and of Gorter (1987) in Friesland. The Alsatian case shows that language responds to complex and powerful societal changes, currents, and pressures. But, as John Edwards (1985: 86) points out, 'it is much more natural for language use to change, or for linguistic contact to emerge and recede, than to have linguistic stasis'. The Alsatian dialect indeed does appear to be in danger especially since the end of World War II but the shift to French is not simply the result of French linguistic policies, as argued by some, but of trends which date back to much earlier times: French has long been present in Alsace, as a language of culture and prestige. After the French Revolution, except for periods of German rule, French was making slow but steady progress in Alsatian society. Thus, rather than viewing language shift as a break with a previous (supposedly) static linguistic situation, it may be more realistic and useful to see it as a manifestation of altering identity. And though changes in linguistic behavior and the development of a different Alsatian identity may be difficult, painful, and not welcomed by all, Alsatians themselves have been major agents of Frenchification and language shift. Not that language shift is a conscious goal. But the cost of perceived advancement which means acquiring and using French is considered to be less than the cost of not making linguistic adjustment and changes.

< previous page

page_6

next page >

< previous page

page_7

next page > Page 7

1 The Geography, Dialect and History of Alsace Geographical Setting The geographical area of present-day Alsace owes its borders to both nature and man. Alsace is a province in Eastern France which extends between the natural boundaries formed by the Vosges mountains to the west and the Rhine river to the east. The northern limit of Alsace, the course of the Lauter River, was adopted after Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo. The southern limit, set at the Territoire de Belfort, was adopted in 1871 after the French defeat in the FrancoPrussian war. On the north and the east, Alsace shares a border with Germany, and in the south with Switzerland. Administratively, Alsace is divided into two départments: the Bas-Rhin (administrative capital, Strasbourg) and the Haut-Rhin (administrative capital, Mulhouse). The 1982 census showed the population to be approximately 1,500,000 of whom around 248,700 live in Strasbourg, 62,500 live in Colmar, and 113,794 in Mulhouse (INSEE, Chiffres pour l'Asace, 1988: 26). Alsace is at one of Europe's major crossroads, where the north south route along the Rhine links Northern to Southern Europe, and where the east west route links Paris to Munich, Vienna, and Milan. The Alsatian Dialect The following brief discussion aims at situating Alsatian among other varieties of German. For more complete and detailed linguistic descriptions of the Alsation dialect, the reader is referred to the investigations of Keller (1961), Beyer (1964), Philipp (1967), Matzen (1973a), Hessini (1981), the Atlas Linguistique de l'Alsace (Beyer & Matzen, 1969;

< previous page

page_7

next page >

< previous page

page_8

next page > Page 8

Bothorel-Witz, Philipp & Spindler, 1984), and the articles under 'parlers alsaciens' and 'dialecte alsacien' in the Encyclopédiede l'Alsace. For the problems involved in developing a standardized form of Alsatian, see Edmund Jung's book Grammaire de l'Alsacien (1983: 39-109). Alsace is situated along the Franco-German linguistic border which crosses the Western European countries of Belgium, North-eastern France, and Switzerland. Along the Franco-German linguistic border, the dialect continuum is broken, so that understanding between Germanic and Romance populations is not possible. The break developed when the Franks, who occupied most of Gaul in the fifth and sixth centuries, adopted the Romance languages everywhere they formed a minority. The Franco-German linguistic border does not correspond to current political borders. The arrival of Germanic tribes the Alamans first and the Franks later resulted in Frankish (the ancestor of Franconian) becoming the language of Northern Alsace and of Lorraine, while the already well-implanted Alemannic maintained itself in the rest of Alsace (Hessini, 1981: 38). The Alsatian dialects were affected by changes common to all Germanic dialects, and also by others, which only affected parts of the German-speaking area. Among the former is the first consonant shift (Erste Lautverschiebung), which modified the inherited Indo-European obstruents. The most significant changes were the result of the High German Sound Shift (Zweite or Hochdeutsche Lautvershiebung) which began around the sixth century in the south of the German language area, and moved northwards. This sound shift provides the basis for the main divisions of dialects in German-speaking areas, and allows us to situate Alsatian among other German dialects: the 'Alsace Bossue' belongs to the Mitteldeutsh (Central German) dialectal area. The region south of the Alsace Bossue belongs to the Oberdeutch (Upper German) area. (See Map 1.) The development of standard German (new High German) took place outside of Alsace, after the Thirty Years War and Alsace's annexation to France in 1648. Marthe Philipp (1985: 22) writes that 'la formation de la koiné allemande se fera ailleurs, les Alsaciens n'y participeront plus guère, en tousles cas pas ceux qui resteront en Alsace'. Standard German developed mainly 'from the written language of government and business of East Middle German, the standardization process being primarily a written one' (Hessini, 1981: 38). Political and economic factors combined to cause the linguistic forms used at the Saxon Chancery to gain prestige and currency. By the seventeenth century, written German had already

< previous page

page_8

next page >

< previous page

page_9

next page > Page 9

Map 1. Second consonant change Source: Adapted from TV Atlas zur Deutschen Sprache (1985: 64) become so different 'that Alsatians now had to learn it.' This was true also for other varieties of German, as pointed out by Lockwood (1965: 116). The Alsatian spoken in most of Alsace is an Alemannic dialect, as are the Swiss dialects, the dialects of Baden and Swabia in the Federal Republic of Germany, and those of the Vorarlberg in Austria. The Sundgau, in the south of Alsace, belongs to the High Alemannic area like the Swiss dialects. The rest of Alsace belongs to the Low Alemannic domain, but is split up in numerous local varieties. (See Map 2.) R. Matzen, who has headed the Institut de Dialectologie at the University of Strasbourg, points out that there are as many varieties of Alsatian as there are villages, towns, or cities. And he blames this variability for the lack of success in developing an Alsatian standard orthography (Matzen, 1973b: 79). Nevertheless, he sees a process of unifying and convergence towards Strasbourg Alsatian, on the one hand, and Mulhouse Alsatian, on the other. These two culturally and economically important cities have a growing influence and impact on the surrounding areas. Because of modern mobility, exchanges between city and countryside are increasing and becoming more varied. Country dwellers

< previous page

page_9

next page >

< previous page

page_10

next page > Page 10

Map 2. Language varieties in Alsace Source: Adapted from Hessini (1981) drive to town more often, and thousands of workers have jobs in the big cities where they hear the more prestigious and refined city language, adopt it, and bring it to their families. 'Satellite' villages and towns, populated by commuters to the cities, contribute to spreading the urban dialect variety, as well as radio stations (Matzen, 1973b: 79-80). Linguistic differences between varieties of Alsatian depend on geographical distance between them. From one locality to the next, differences are slight and communication is easy. However, the local varieties of Strasbourg and Mulhouse are often felt to be 'quite different' by speakers of these areas. The perceived differences can

< previous page

page_10

next page >

< previous page

page_11

next page > Page 11

cause a 'dépaysement linguistique considerable,' i.e. the feeling that one is hearing a linguistically foreign or alien variety. In spite of this feeling of strangeness, inter-comprehension between various Alsatian dialects does not 'really suffer' (Encyclopédie de l'Alsace: 5838). Matzen (1988: 267) points out that it is at the syntactic and even more so at the lexical level that the 'kinship between Alsatian and German is most evident' making it easy for dialectophone students to learn High German. But while Alsatian shares many similarities with other dialects of German, it also differs from them in important respects: a major characteristic of Alsatian dialects is the incorporation of a large number of French lexical borrowings. Keller has already noted that because of close contact with French, the national language spoken by the vast majority of Alsatians, 'the function which elsewhere is fulfilled in varying degrees by NHG is here carried out by French' (Keller, 1961: 116). Most loans are assimilated to Alsatian phonology, morphology, and syntax. Hessini (1981: 42) divides borrowings from French into three large categories: (1) military and ecclesiastical terms; (2) education, government, and administration; and (3) those related to the prestige of French culture, such as etiquette, fashions, cooking, etc. In the list of borrowings which appear in the German-language press in Alsace, Maguenau's (1962) categories include state and politics, army, and war, administration, public professions, judicial, finances/taxes, social services, health-related occupations, education and youth organizations, knowledge and research, church, cultural and economic life, sports, transportation, media, economic activities such as commerce, industry, agriculture, housing, daily life objects, foods/meals, clothing and a miscellaneous category. While the linguitic fact that Alsatian is a Germanic dialect was recognized and accepted at certain times in the past, this was not the case at others. In seventeenth-century France, Alsace was described as 'conquered territory in Germany' (Philipps, 1982: 44). During the French Revolution, a proclamation from St Just and Lebas to the women of Strasbourg was posted in German and in French. The German message read: 'Die Bürgerinnen Strassburgs sind eingeladen die teutsche Tracht abzulegen, da ihre Herzen fränkisch gesinnt sind' (The female citizens of Strasbourg are invited to discard their German costume, since their hearts are inclined towards France) (Philipps, 1978: 57). Only in the nineteenth century, when German nationalists demanded the annexation of Alsace, on the grounds that a Germanic dialect was spoken there, did the erroneous belief spread that it was not so. Some, like Louis Battifol in 1919, by studying the shape of skulls, attempted to prove that Alsatians were really

< previous page

page_11

next page >

< previous page

page_12

next page > Page 12

descendants of Celts and that, as a result, the language spoken in Alsace was Celtic! History of Alsace Political, social and economic events affect the place of a language variety in a given society. Indeed, present-day patterns of the social use of language are the outcome of complex historical processes and powerful societal currents, pressures, and changes. Le Page & Tabouret-Keller (1985), Strauss (1980), Philipps (1975, 1978, 1982), Deyon (1986), Sankoff (1980), and Limón (1979), among others, have pointed out the necessity of historical study in order to provide an explanation to language choice and distribution in bi/multilingual situations. Furthermore, Le Page & TabouretKeller's theory of acts of identity claims that people adopt the rules of behaviour including speech of the groups with which they want to identify. They consider motivation as the most important constraint governing linguistic behavior. Indeed, it is my contention that motivation to use Alsatian and/or French cannot be grasped without an understanding of the role which historical and social aspects of language contact have played, and are still playing in Alsace. Accordingly, the following discussion of the history of Alsace seeks to identify and analyze the social, psychological and ultimately linguistic effects of recent and less-recent political changes. For while the nationality of the rulers determined the official language in Alsace, and affected the varying fortunes of the languages in contact i.e. the gradual strengthening, alternately, of German and French, and the continuous use of the Alsatian dialect language use also depends on the linguistic attitudes and choices made by individual speakers. The examination of social trends offers clues as to how social changes alter evaluations of languages, and the social statuses associated with them. In particular, this section attempts to trace changes of perception of 'Frenchness,' 'Germanness,' or 'Alsatianness,' and the role of language as a symbol of identity. Perhaps the most notable fact about Alsace is that, after being part of the German world for more than a thousand years, it became French in 1648, as a result of Louis XIV's military strength and diplomatic efforts. Up to the French Revolution in 1789, although Alsace was part of France, it retained its German characteristics, in particular its language. The French Revolution of 1789 was welcomed in Alsace, even though its subsequent repressive linguistic policies were not.

< previous page

page_12

next page >

< previous page

page_13

next page > Page 13

After 1870 Alsace was, in Hessini's (1981: 11) words, 'disputed, coveted, shuffled back and forth' by Germany and France. The defeat of Napoleon III, in 1870, resulted in the annexation of Alsace to Germany. Germany based its claims on the fact that Alsatians spoke a German dialect, and that therefore they were German. At the end of World War I, in 1918, Alsace was returned to France. It remained French until the beginning of the Nazi occupation in 1940. After a five-year German rule, Alsace became French again in 1945, and it remained so to this day. Alsatians who were 75 years old or older in 1945, had experienced five successive changes in nationality! Each time, the aim of the victorious state was to favor and expand the use of the national language through more-or-less active attempts at political, cultural and linguistic assimilation. Below, the significant dates in Alsatian history are adapted from Hessini (1981) and Wolf & Fisher (1983). The dates reflect turning points in the history of Alsace. Their bearing on its linguistic destiny will be discussed at length below. They are: Fifth century AD: The Alemanni (Germanic tribes) invade Alsace. German dialects are spoken in Alsace from that time on. 870- Alsace is part of the Holy Roman Empire, and Charlemagne's 1648: Empire. 1539: The Ordinance of Villeret-Côteret in France decrees that French is the only official language of the realm so, to some degree, linguistic domination begins in Alsace as soon as it is annexed in 1648. 1648: Alsace becomes French under Louis XIV. 1789: Turning point in the linguistic history of Alsace. The linguistic question becomes politized; German becomes the language of the enemy. 1871: Alsace is annexed to the Second Reich, after Napoleon III's defeat. 1918: End of World War I: Alsace becomes French again, after the German defeat and the Treaty of Versailles. Germany is humiliated, and the desire for revenge grows. 1920- Automist unrest and 'malaise alsacien.' 1936: 1939: World War II erupts. 374,000 Alsatians (roughly one-third of the Alsatian population) are evacuated to south-western France. 1940- Alsace is annexed to the Third Reich. 45

< previous page

page_13

next page >

< previous page

page_14

next page > Page 14

1945: Alsace becomes French again after the Allied victory in World War II. Medieval period For 800 years Alsace remained part of the Holy Roman Empire. During that time, Alsace was divided into numerous more-or-less independent ecclesiastical or secular lordships and municipalities. Culturally, Alsace enjoyed a golden period in the Middle Ages. Strasbourg was a center of German Humanism and, after Mainz, the oldest center of printing. Its university enjoyed a reputation for excellence in the German-speaking world, and such distinguished writers as Gottfried of Strasbourg, Geiler von Kaisersberg, Sebastian Brant author of Das Narrenshiff and Johann Fishart produced works which continue to occupy an important place in German literary history. 1648-1870 Alsace under French rule Louis XIV's military power and diplomatic efforts brought the annexation of Alsace t except for the ten Imperial Free Cities, and Mulhouse, which belonged to the Swiss Confederation to France in 1648. A French book published in 1660 called Alsace a 'conquered territory in Germany' (Philipps, 1982: 44). Alsatians were considered to be Germans who had been newly integrated into the French kingdom. Up to the French Revolution in 1789, although Alsace was part of France, it was allowed to retain its German characteristics and its language. This changed, as revolutionary policies endeavoured to suppress all regional languages in France. In part, this was a result of the revolutionary government's association of language with nationhood. Government decrees about language were mostly unrealistic and unsuccessful at assimilating a resisting Alsatian population. Still, the language policies did have some important consequences: French became the language of education in state-supported secondary and higher educational institutions. And the Revolutionary language policies established precedents which later governments were to follow systematically. Another factor which favored the spread of French was the Revolutionary government's military enlistment of men from all regions of France. Because of the levée en masse necessary to defend France, Bretons, Catalans, Basques and

< previous page

page_14

next page >

< previous page

page_15

next page > Page 15

Occitans came into contact with each other and discovered first-hand the usefulness of a common language. Perhaps the most decisive change brought by the French Revolution was that, in Philipps' (1975: 70) words, 'Dorénavant, l'usage du français sera toujours considéré comme le signe extérieur par excellence du patriotisme français'. Henceforth, language use became politicized, since Alsatians who did not understand or speak French became suspect in certain circles (Philipps, 1975: 51-82; Craig, 1984: 20). Although the Napoleonic (1799-1814) and Restoration (1814-1830) governments paid less attention to the language question than had the Revolutionary governments, a process of Frenchification was none the less at work. Three main developments are noteworthy. First, most Alsatians began to think of themselves as Frenchmen, and identified with the grande patrie. Napoleon deserves much of the credit for this trend, because of his religious policies, and because of his curtailment of forcible Frenchification policies. The glory and prosperity of his rule made his regime very popular, and many Alsatians served with distinction in his army. As the prestige of France increased among Alsatians, so did the French language. At this time, French was becoming a stronger marker of social status. A German observer of the time observed that French took over as the Alsatians' Hochdeutsch. Secondly, economic and administrative reforms also strengthened the ties with the interior: barriers to trade were removed and the same administrative structure was set up as in the rest of France. The burgeoning bourgeoisie, especially, found new incentives to learn French in the growing economic integration with the rest of France, and many Alsatians felt a natural sympathy for the ideals of the Enlightenment and of the Revolution (Craig, 1984: 20-1). A third development which contributed to Frenchification hinged on nationalistic trends across the Rhine. German proponents of German unification professed that language and nation were inseparable, and since Alsatians spoke a German dialect, they should become a part of Germany. Thus, the linguistic situation in Alsace was transformed from a domestic question into an international one. The July Monarchy (1830-1848) did not actively pursue assimilation, but it did pay particular attention to education. Day-care centers were created (by the 1830s, 300 such centres were in operation in Alsace, one-sixth of the national total), and time alotted to the learning of French was increased. Schools were stocked with French readers. In order to train more qualified French-speaking teachers, the normal school in Strasbourg

< previous page

page_15

next page >

< previous page

page_16

next page > Page 16

was expanded, while a new one was founded in Colmar. Although schooling was not yet compulsory, and older teachers still spoke little French, good progress at Frenchification was made during this period. During the Restoration and the July Monarchy, the urban haute bourgeoisie abandoned the dialect and German. In the 1820s, young Alsatians spoke French, and looked to Paris as their model for fashions and life style, while their parents continued to use the dialect. In the 1830s French attained parity as the language of business and culture, and by midcentury, French had become the everyday language for most bourgeois families (Craig, 1985: 23). By the 1850s, French was making inroads also among functionaries and shopkeepers. Increased trade and communication with the interior, schooling, military service, and the increased possibilities for social mobility all combined to give the French language a usefulness which it had not had before. During the Second Republic (1848-1851) and the Second Empire (1851-1870), representatives of the central government continued their pursuit of Frenchification, with growing 'support of Paris and a greater sense of urgency. By now the growth of German nationalism had convinced many that full linguistic assimilation was a matter of national security' (Craig, 1985: 22). Other arguments in favor of rapid Frenchification were the alleged low moral tone of dialect-speaking villages, where drunkenness, fighting, and crime were supposedly more prevalent. Another argument was the usefulness of French for upward mobility, self-improvement, and participation in the cultural, political and economic life of the nation. While French had made inroads in the upper and middle classes, the majority of Alsatian peasants, artisans, and urban workers (four-fifths of the population) continued to use the dialect. They viewed French as the 'language of the rich,' and as alien. 'They were generally indifferent to the language question, seeing no conflict between their Germanic dialect and their French patriotism' (Craig, 1984: 24). Despite this initial resistance to assimilation, French did make progress among the popular classes, and many children were leaving school with a good knowledge of both German and French in the late 1860s. An estimated 15% of the population in Alsace could speak French, although many speakers did not speak it fluently or often. Yet, the optimism of the authorities was strong, and the eventual success of Frenchification was no longer in doubt (Craig, 1984: 24). Rodolph Heuss notes that if it had not been for the FrancoPrussian war of 1870, urban workers and rural populations would have understood, if not spoken, French by the end of the nineteenth century,

< previous page

page_16

next page >

< previous page

page_17

next page > Page 17

while remaining faithful to their native dialects (Streicher, Fisher & Blaze, 1979, II: 89). 1870-1918 Alsace becomes part of the second Reich In 1871, Alsace was annexed to the German Empire after the defeat of Napoleon III. Among German intellectuals, the feeling was that Alsatians were objectively Germans through culture, language, and ethnicity, and that appropriate policies would soon help Alsatians discover their true identity. Edwin yon Manteuffel, who was statthalter (governor) in 1879, thought it necessary to win over Alsatian notables and industrialists by flattering them and asking for their advice, and speaking French to them. But his policies were criticized, especially by German immigrants to Alsace, who thought that he should do more to improve the lot of common people, who were 'the only Alsatians ... likely to repay concessions with sympathy for German rule' (Craig, 1984: 87). The conciliatory policies of the statthalters in Alsace disappointed many Germans. More repressive measures were taken after all 15 Alsatian deputies voted against an army bill supported by Bismarck, which would have increased the army's presence in Alsace. Intensified surveillance of proFrench groups and individuals was increased. Two hundred social and cultural organizations which were suspected of anti-German feeling were dissolved. Revealing of the German authorities' desire to assimilate Alsace was the decision to found a German university at Strasbourg which would reflect the greatness and the superiority of German culture and scholarship. It was believed that a strong commitment to quality education would win the respect and the approval of Alsatians. And indeed, the university's academic standards were high. As long as the German administration was conciliatory and understanding towards Alsatian Francophile student organizations, it seems that relations between Alsatians and Germans grew increasingly accepting and accommodating. But when some Francophile campus organizations were banned, other organizations were founded to carry on the ideals and goals of the banned organizations. When one prominent Francophile student leader was expelled from the university, he quickly became a martyr and a hero, both in France and in Alsace (Craig, 1984: 177). By the early twentieth century, German rule was becoming increasingly acceptable. As time went on, the number of revanchist organizations declined. Even many Francophiles saw positive aspects economic and

< previous page

page_17

next page >

< previous page

page_18

next page > Page 18

cultural in German rule. Some were hoping for full autonomy within the German Empire. 1918-1940 Alsace is French again The German attitude had been that neglect of French would eliminate French. And indeed French had regressed. After World War I, the percentage of Alsatians who could speak French fluently is estimated at 2%, and another 8% of the population had a 'relative knowledge of French' (Maugué, 1970: 149). While the majority of Alsatians welcomed their return to French rule in 1918, misunderstandings were bound to occur. The French had assumed that Alsatians would welcome quick and total assimilation, while Alsatians knew very little about contemporary France. Their patriotism was based on their pre-1870 perception of France. The most salient obstacle to assimilation was precisely the language problem. While the French language had lost ground in Alsace during the 1870-1918 period, the rest of France had moved closer to linguistic unity and, in the process, to the association of French patriotism with the use of French. 'One result was that of regarding Alsatians who spoke French as patriots while dismissing the rest, the great majority, as 'Boches or Bochophiles' derogatory names for Germanophiles. But while Alsatians wanted their children to learn French, they also opposed the exclusion of German or the dialect (Craig, 1984: 273). Autonomist unrest In the mid-1920s what is now called the malaise alsacien developed into an autonomist movement. The ElsassLothringische Heimatbund political party was founded with the aim to resist assimilation to France, and to achieve autonomy within the framework of France (Streicher, Fisher & Blèze, 1979: 152). Autonomists fostered a wave of particularistic sentiment in Alsace, and established contact with other autonomist movements in France such as the Breton, Corsican and Flemish movements. In spite of the growing boldness and strength of the autonomist parties (some of which were receiving financial assistance from Germany), the French government was very restrained at first, but later closed some journals, organized counter demonstrations, and arrested some autonomist leaders (Craig, 1984: 294).

< previous page

page_18

next page >

< previous page

page_19

next page > Page 19

In the mid-1930s the political climate began to change, mostly because of the coming to power of the Nazis in Germany. Developments in Germany had important consequences for the image that 'particularistic Alsatians had of Germany, and consequently, of France.' Although some autonomists became admirers of Nazi policies, most autonomists were alarmed and repelled by Nazi methods, and this made them identify more with France (Craig, 1984: 314-15). After the Austro-German Anschluss of March 1938, most Alsatians favored the conciliatory and appeasement policies of the French government. Having borne the brunt of invasions before, 'Alsatians were even less willing than those in the Interior to go to war over Austria or Czechoslovakia.' The developing international crisis also widened the gap between pro-Nazis among autonomists and other autonomists and regionalists. While the former hoped that Hitler would soon turn his attention to Alsace, the latter 'remained or became openly loyal to France, and in the interests of national unity and of not whetting Hitler's appetite toned down their criticisms and demands' (Craig, 1984: 316). 1940-1945: the Nazi Occupation After the invasion of Poland by German troops, the French government, fearing the worst, decided to evacuate the population living ahead of the Maginot Line. Alsatian evacuees numbered around 374,000, and came from 181 towns and villages, abandoning 127,000 hectares of cultivated land. Houses left empty were often plundered, creating even more hardships. When Alsace was again invaded by Hitler's army, German authorities put up posters urging the Alsatian population not to be afraid of German soldiers, because they came 'not as enemies, but as liberators.' (Streicher, Fisher & Blaze, 1979: 171). The newly appointed Gauleiter Robert Wagner announced that the Nazi goal was to free Alsace from foreign domination, and to return it to the bosom of its German mother country for evermore. While German authorities professed certainty about Alsatians' 'true' German identity, it was necessary to convince Alsatians about the matter. Nazi authorities determined that Alsatians must be made more aware of their history, their language, their customs, and their art as an expression of their Germanness and to make them accept that fact.

< previous page

page_19

next page >

< previous page

page_20

next page > Page 20

Reshaping the Alsatian identity into a German one was a task that the Nazis took on in a thorough, systematic, and relentless fashion. The Entwelschung and Gleichschaltung policies left no part of Alsatian life untouched: in private or in public, at home, or in the street, Alsatians were to work at being or becoming totally German. Posters proclaimed 'Raus mit dem Welschen Plunder!'. Street names were changed, not without some unwanted humorous effects, e.g. in Mulhouse, the Wild Man Street (Rue du Sauvage) was renamed Adolf Hitler Strasse. Proper names were changed: René would become Rainer, and French-sounding last names also had to be Germanized, for the Gauleiter believed that 'nothing contributed more to the reminder of France than the daily use of a French name' (Kettenacker, 1978, II: 47). (For more on the Germanization of names, see Irjud, 1987.) Signs on store fronts were also repainted. Monuments erected during the French administration were removed. The Strasbourgeois were incensed to see their beloved statue of the Napoleonic General Kleber taken down, along with all the statues of Joan of Arc often seen in the monuments to the dead, or in churches. French cultural organizations were dissolved. Clothing was to be German. Berets (labelled Gehirnverdunkelungskappen) were forbidden, and the Nazis went as far as distributing German hats and caps. French was no longer to be spoken, and strict punishments were enforced. Even the greetings bonjour, au revoir, and adieu, all of which had long since been borrowed into Alsatian, could no longer be used. Those caught speaking French would be fined or arrested. A pharmacist and a hairdresser from Colmar were sent to the concentration camp of Schirmeck for speaking French, and four high-school students spent 15 days in prison for having spoken French on the street (Philipps, 1975: 230). Posters exhorted Alsatians 'Elsässer sprecht Eure Deutsche Sprache!' According to the German historian Kettenacker, although Alsatians spoke a Germanic dialect, this fact did not reflect a German national consciousness, nor was it an implicit profession of faith for Germany. Now that their mother tongue was sanctioned by the Nazis, and that they were urged to speak it, many Alsatians felt scruples about using it. What would have pleased them coming from French authorities, now chagrined them coming from German Nazis (Kettenacker, 1978, II: 46). In fact, not speaking the Alsatian dialect meant resisting the Nazis, and choosing to speak French rather than Alsatian was one way to disassociate oneself from the Nazis, and to protest their rule. In reality, in spite of affirmations to the contrary, German authorities had no interest in maintaining the Alsatian dialect. A 1944 circular asserted that 'local dialects also represent, undoubtedly, an obstacle to

< previous page

page_20

next page >

< previous page

page_21

next page > Page 21

the evolution of our people towards the unity of the nation' (Kettenacker, 1978, II: 57). Not unlike revolutionary France, the Third Reich equated national unity with linguistic unity. The injunction 'Elsäisser, sprecht-eure Muttersprache,' at first, was less an invitation to speak the dialect than not to speak French. Later, it became a demand to use Hochdeutsch, even in ordinary everyday conversations something which had never been done in Alsace (Philipps, 1975: 234). Not only was it the aim of the Nazis to eradicate the French language in Alsace, and to make Alsatians forget about the French portion of their history, but it was the long-term goal of the Nazis to minimize anything strictly Alsatian, in order to emphasize their Germanness and to turn Alsatians into authentic Reichsdeutsche (Philipps, 1975: 229). The name Alsace itself was to disappear. Alsace and Lorraine were to become an integral part of two larger areas, one of which would be named Westmark and would have its capital in Sarrebruck, while the other would be called Oberrhein and would have Strasbourg as its capital (Philipps, 1975: 235). Between 1941 and 1944, some 140,000 Alsatian men, aged 17-38 were forcibly enlisted into the Wehrmacht, and sent, for the most part, to the Russian front. About 30,000 of these men died. Punishment for resisting enlistment was severe. Near Altkirch, 18 young men tried to flee into Switzerland in February of 1943: three were killed in the attempt, and 13 were shot later. In 1944, 42 Alsatians, former officers in the French army, refused to enter the Waffen-SS. They were deported to Neuengamme, where 20 died (Philipps, 1978: 99). Alsatians were particularly resentful of the deportation of parents whose sons had fled to France to avoid forced incorporation into the Wehrmacht, or of those young Alsatians who deserted. 1 Post World War II Period After the Allied victory over Germany in 1945, and after the hardships caused by the war (loss of lives and property, evacuation of Alsatians, forced enlistment, and liquidation), Alsatians were weary and just aspired to peace. Although there can be no doubt that the vast majority of Alsatians welcomed their return to France, disappointments and misunderstandings once more clouded this period. Military operations were accompanied by a wave of épuration. Some 45,000 Alsatians found themselves briefly

< previous page

page_21

next page >

< previous page

page_22

next page > Page 22

interned. Twenty thousand denunciations for various degrees of collaboration with the enemy during the Nazi occupation resulted in eight thousand condemnations, most of them to fines, confiscations of property or banishment (interdictions de séjour). Often, accusations of collaboration with or of membership in Nazi organizations had no substance, and were made out of malice. These excesses were denounced by some political parties such as the MRP and the RPF (Streicher, Fisher & Blèze, 1979, 2: 211). Autonomism was often wrongly equated with treason, even though most autonomists were not Nazi collaborators (Beer, 1980: 16). This was not unusual, since autonomous sentiments in France have always been regarded with suspicion, because it was felt that they could lead to the temptation of secession. The fact that some Alsatian conscripts were enlisted in the Waffen SS meant that 13 of them were present at the 1944 massacre of 642 civilians in Oradour-sur-Glane, even though except for one of them they were not accomplices to the deed. Their trial had the regrettable effect of linking Alsatians to Nazi atrocities, and the French press often blurred the distinction between Alsatians and Nazis (Streicher, 1979, 2: 23). The quasi-equation of Alsatians and Nazis, and autonomist unrest, had serious and damaging consequences for how Alsatians were perceived by the French of the 'Interior,' and consequently on the desire of many Alsatians to prove these perceptions wrong. Politicians like Michel Debré, the first prime minister of the Fifth Republic, thought that a centralized state authority was necessary to combat potential dissidence in the provinces. Debré also stressed that language was a factor of national unity. The role of French schools today is still seen as reinforcing national unity by teaching a model of French 'identical' for all Frenchmen (Fantapié, 1979: 211-12). The schools, then, were seen as a major tool for the continued assimilation of Alsace to France. While the teaching of German had been tolerated at most times, it was temporarily stopped in 1945, to regain lost ground. And a vigorous poster campaign in Alsace proclaimed: 'C'est chic de parler français!' That assimilation policies were largely successful is reflected in the results of recent surveys: knowledge of French jumped from 66.4% to 80.5% among Alsatians, between 1946 and 1962. A 1979 government census did not even include questions on knowledge of French, since it was assumed to be generalized. Not until 1951, did the Deixonne law officially recognize regional languages in France, but Flemish, Alsatian and Corsican were excluded from the field of application of this law on the grounds that they are varieties of foreign languages. The Deixonne law and the 1975 Loi Haby allowed the

< previous page

page_22

next page >

< previous page

page_23

next page > Page 23

teaching of regional languages and cultures in the schools, but were hardly ever applied. The Savary Circular (Circulaire Savary) of 1982 is much more positive in its wording and spirit, and views the teaching of regional languages and culture as a worthwhile educational pursuit. This new attitude contrasts with the traditional disinterest, disdain, and even downright antagonism of French authorities towards regional languages. Yet, the status of regional languages, including Alsatian, is still not drastically changed, since, as Woehrling (1983) points out, if they were deemed important, they would be compulsory subjects in schools. Recent ethnic activism in France is partly a reaction against centralization and the preoccupation of the French government with national unity and uniformity (Beer, 1980: Chapter 1). Since the 1960s, language maintenance groups in Alsace, like other linguistic minorities in France, have become active in defending the interests of their regional languages. The largest and best-organized group in Alsace is the Cercle René Schickele, named after an Alsatian writer. The Cercle publishes a quarterly magazine Land un Sproch which contains informative articles in French, in High German, and in the dialect. The Cercle actively promotes language maintenance, and it views its role as a movement to sensitize and educate. Some results have been achieved, but it does not appear that the Cercle René Schickele has attracted the participation of the general population. Their work will be discussed more in depth in Chapter 2. Still, the impact of language promotion groups can be decisive, since Erik Allardt points out that 'the very existence of linguistic minorities seems to depend more and more on persons who are willing and keen to organize, agitate or indulge in cultural activities on behalf of their language group' (Allardt, 1984: 204). Conclusion The preceding historical sketch allows some important points to be made. First, it demonstrates why, in spite of their use of a Germanic dialect, and their belonging and richly contributing to German culture during a thousand years, Alsatians cannot be equated with Germans, as is still sometimes done (Reuter, 1987: 217). Alsatians have rarely been recognized for what they are: a people profoundly influenced by its ties to both the French and the German world. As Strauss points out, Alsace is unique in that,

< previous page

page_23

next page >

< previous page

page_24

next page > Page 24

having been a part of the German world for 1,000 years, it nevertheless changed its national loyalty and sentiment, accepting as a consequence of this change, a sociolinguistic situation in which the continued use not only of High German, but even the regional German idioms, is critically endangered (Strauss, 1981: 192) Strauss points out that German nationalism in the nineteenth century did not affect Alsace-Lorraine, since these provinces were outside the German borders. The use of a German dialect in Alsace did not reflect a German national consciousness, nor did it signify an implicit profession of faith for Germany during World War II. Conversely, while allegiance to France and the priority of French is no longer questioned by most Alsatians, total assimilation to France has been difficult. Observers have long noted the dual personality of Alsatians. In his 1951 perceptive analysis of the Alsatian character, Frédéric Hoffet (an Alsatian himself) writes: Alsatians mostly speak a German dialect, sing German songs, they frequently pray in German ... but they dress themselves and they furnish their houses like Frenchmen. They are critical like Frenchmen, they laugh like Frenchmen, and like them, they make fun of ... the Germans (1951: 105) The unique blend of German and French characteristics and traditions led the Germans to believe that Alsatians were, in Hessini's (1981) words 'vaguely Frenchified Germans,' while the French regarded Alsatians as 'Frenchmen torn away from the bosom of the mother country.' Second, linguistically French and German have long been in contact in Alsace and French has long been a language of prestige in the entire German world. Levy asserts that children from the upper-class German families were sent to France for their education as early as the eleventh century (Philipps, 1975: 269). Although it is difficult to know how widespread this practice was, it may have been the beginning of the prestige enjoyed by French culture and the French language in the German world. In the seventeenth century, French schools in Strasbourg attracted not only Alsatians, but also Germans wanting to learn that language. French loan words were incorporated into medieval German literature, and probably into the spoken language also, as Germans perceived French chivalry, manners and dress as superior to their own. French influence and prestige continued to increase throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries (Wells, 1985: 265-7). French was the language of diplomacy, and also the language of princes and the urban patriciate. Frederick

< previous page

page_24

next page >

< previous page

page_25

next page > Page 25

William I of Prussia generally spoke French to his wife, and his son, Frederick II, wrote his books in French. Voltaire's remark while visiting the Prussian court is well known and revealing: 'Je me trouve ici en France. On ne parle que notre langue. L'allemand est pour les soldats et les chevaux' (Keller, 1978: 487). Even while encouraging the study and promotion of the German language, the philosopher Leibnitz wrote almost all his works in Latin or in French (Keller, 1978: 487). French was a 'badge of breeding' and the influential elite was lost to German even as late as the eighteenth century. That those attitudes endured partially is shown in Dr Ströhlin's 1943 letter, in which he accuses German functionaries in Alsace of using French (both during the Second and Third Reich annexations), thus reinforcing the feeling that it was the language of a superior culture. 2 To this we might add that the desire of the French government to impose French in the provinces derives from the selfperception of Frenchmen that theirs is a language superior to any other. French is viewed as clear, precise, rational, elegant and harmonious. As Fishman (1972: 64) has said, it is viewed as 'a gift to all mankind, an instrument of pure reason and a creation of sublime and natural beauty'. How could Alsatians remain unaffected by these views? It was not difficult for them to believe the post-war posters which proclaimed 'C'est chic de parler français!' Third, the use of French in Alsace was always most widespread in upper and middle classes. These groups, according to Craig, associated France with intellectual refinement and good taste, and Germany, by contrast, with cultural backwardness and boorishness. Unlike Germans, and particularly those settling in the Reichsland, they accorded higher status to businessmen and members of the free professions than to the bureaucrats, military officers and men of learning (Craig, 1985: 103) In the decades after the 1871 annexation to the Second Reich, French continued to progress among Alsatian middle and upper classes, with speaking French now a means of defying the new rulers, as well as a mark of high social status. Even the contemporary Alsatian bourgeoisie has been said to show 'distinction and class' by speaking French (Hessini, 1981: 145). Fourth, the Nazi occupation of 1940, with its repressive policies to stamp out anything French, 'did more for the French cause than two and a half centuries of French rule before' (Olson, 1974: 50). Philipps (1975: 247) confirms that the disastrous effects of Nazism for German and for

< previous page

page_25

next page >

< previous page

page_26

next page > Page 26

the Alsatian dialect cannot be underestimated. 3 The revelations after the war of the extent of the atrocities perpetrated against Jews and other 'undesirable' minorities, meant even more of a desire for Alsatians not to be confused with Nazis. It is no wonder then that most Alsatians felt the desire to get rid of anything that reminded them of the German occupation and by extension, of their burdensome Germanic language (Philipps, 1975: 247). In some sense, too, Alsatians could blame their dialect for their miseries. Was it not because of the dialect that Hitler could refer to Alsace's place in Deutschtum? And was not the forced enlistment of young Alsatians into the Wehrmacht considerably facilitated by their knowledge of a Germanic dialect? By the same token, the generation of under-45-years-old has no recollection of the Nazi period, and therefore does not have these negative associations with German or the dialect. Fifth, related to the periods of German rule is the fact that after becoming part of France again, Alsatians often were suspect and made to feel guilty simply because of speaking a dialect which sounded like the language of the enemy. While some Alsatians were being punished by military tribunals for using the French language a sign of Francophile feelings in public during German rule in the 1880s and during the Nazi occupation, other Alsatians who had emigrated to the 'Interior' were suspect to Frenchmen because of their Germanic accents and names (Wolf & Fisher, 1983: 13). Accusations of treason and lack of patriotism were leveled against Alsatians alternately by France and Germany. Today, Alsatians are sensitive to accusations that they are different, and to suspicions of lack of loyalty. In reaction, some have tried to prove themselves as true Frenchmen by displaying intense chauvinism and asserting their allegiance to France. This goes as far as denying that the dialect spoken in Alsace is a variety of German. The French journalist Pierre Richardot reports the outraged reaction of an Alsatian member of the audience at a 1979 conference on regional languages in France when the Alsatian dialect was described as a dialect of German (Land un Sproch, 1980, No. 4: 10). That feelings are still running high is also evinced by some of the graffiti in the University of Strasbourg reported by Hessini. One statement read: Les Alsaciens sont une bande de chiens! Ils ne savent même pas parler le français ou alors quand ils le parlent, c'est avec un accent horrible, le plus ridicule de France. Sales Boches, hors de France!' (Hessini, 1981: 161-2). Alsatians have repeatedly been under suspicion, and the guilt of not appearing patriotic enough, and the desire to be accepted as loyal

< previous page

page_26

next page >

< previous page

page_27

next page > Page 27

Frenchmen partly explains why Alsatians acquiesced to assimilationist educational and linguistic policies after World War II. Sixth, the recent surge of activism and change of policy by the French government may affect the linguistic situation in the future. The confusion between language and nationality seems to be over, thanks to greater awareness of other European and world minority groups, whose languages are also endangered by contact with a prestige national language variety. Notes 1. See a book by Lou Uberti C'est pour demain camarades alsaciens! (1982), a semi-autobiographical account of the hardships of a malgré nous, i.e., of a young man forcibly enlisted in the German army. 2. Dr Ströhlin, a Burgmeister of the city of Stuttgart, wrote a report in which he analyzes the history of Alsace up to 1940, and in particular of the errors committed during the 1870-1918 German rule. Among those errors he lists, the use of French even by German functionaries, thus reinforcing the feeling that it was the language of a superior culture. Dr Ströhlin attibutes the 'attitude of refusal' of Alsatians to the fact that Alsatians felt that Germans treated them as the vanquished and underdeveloped. They perceived Nazi officials as arrogant, haughty and hypocritical. Alsatians believed that the interdiction of French was ridiculous, and did not like having to change their names to more Germanic ones. Dr Ströhlin recommended that the religious sensitivities of Alsatians be respected, and that a core of collaborators be sought among peasants, craftsmen, small merchants, and pastors and priests among whom could be found the most Germanophiles. He also argued that Alsace should become a German state, that Alsatians should be recruited as functionaries, and that the French language must disappear from schools and public life (Kettenacker, 1978, I: 1206). 3. Interestingly, there was a similar backlash against German in Luxemburg, right after the war (Philipps, 1978: 63). And even in German communities in the United States, the excesses of Nazi rule dealt a blow to the use and teaching of German (Yox, 1990).

< previous page

page_27

next page >

< previous page

page_28

next page > Page 28

2 Review of Previous Studies The following discussion reviews recent sociolinguistic research dealing with language use/choice in Alsace. Studies describing the linguistic situation in Alsace are few in number, of uneven quality and, except for census data and a study by Denis & Veltman (1989), few comprehensive studies exist for all of the region. The picture that emerges from the research is not always clear. Assessments of the future of the dialect range from relatively optimistic to alarming. Furthermore, comparison of the studies is difficult, since methodology, population samples, goals and criteria differ. Nevertheless, they point to overall trends and they provide a useful frame of reference for the present study. Existing research falls into several categories. Verdoodt (1968), Olson (1974), Stephens (1976) and Zimmer (1977), provide general descriptions of the situation in Alsace, which are primarily based on a variety of previous sources. Other studies by Beer (1980), Olson (1980), Tabouret-Keller (1981), and Neville (1987) place Alsace in the context of other minority languages in France and describe the common problems they share. Philipps (1978, 1982), Stauffer (1979), and Streicher (1982), provide useful background information from the point of view of Alsatian language activists or advocates of regionalism in Alsace; and while their commitment to the cause of Alsatian makes their work open to questions, they none the less offer relevant information, and reflect the perceptions, attitudes, and aspirations of a part of the Alsatian population. Philipps' (1975) Les Luttes Linguistiques en Alsace Jusqu'en 1945, is a factual and richly documented inquiry of the political and linguistic history of Alsace. Vogler (1974), Hug (1975) and Woehrling (1983) investigate educational choices in Alsace. Most of the above-mentioned studies give little attention to evaluating the samples or methodologies on which their sources are based. The premise of most studies is that language shift is undeniable in Alsace, and their discussions focus on identifying the root causes of language shift, and/or on proposing measures to arrest the decline of the dialect. Other studies, unlike the ones aforementioned, are based on field

< previous page

page_28

next page >

< previous page

page_29

next page > Page 29

research. Statistical information is available from the periodic censuses done by the government-sponsored INSEE. Especially significant for tracing the changes in the use and/or knowledge of French, Alsatian and German, are the INSEE surveys of 1962 and 1979. The figures provided by census reports must be viewed with caution, since the surveys were not meant to be linguistic surveys and the questions asked are often vague, or ambiguous. Furthermore, the INSEE has been accused of manipulating the samples (no speakers under 15 years of age, probably a highly Frenchified group, were included in 1979) and of publishing their very optimistic figures immediately after the publication of Ladin's alarming results (Ladin, 1979). This, language activists charged, was done to contradict and disconfirm the results of Ladin's research, and to lull Alsatians into a false sense of security about the dialect's vitality (Ladin, 1982). Still, the INSEE reports are based on large-scale, random sample surveys, and their results are significant. Statistical analyses directly based on INSEE figures have been done by Veltman (1983) and Denis (1985). These studies, while suggestive, fail to identify which factors determine language choice. A joint study by Denis and Veltman (1989) is based on a statistical analysis of a broad number of Alsatian students and offers the best information yet on language use. Approaches to field research can further be divided into those studies which attempt to describe and explain the patterns of daily linguistic usage primarily in terms of social structure or systemic norms, on the one hand, and those which take into account the individual speaker, on the other hand. The former usually analyze language behavior in relation to variables such as domain, urbanization, industrialization, age, or gender. Cole (1975), Tabouret-Keller (1981), Hessini (1981), Khettry (1982), and Ladin (1982) adopt this approach. These 'macro' studies often rely on questionnaire surveys, or on interviews, with all the inherent limitations of these approaches, i.e. respondents' answers do not always reflect actual behavior. Such studies, however, have been useful in ascertaining a marked language shift towards French in Alsace, and in specifying domains or situations in which one language is exclusively or optionally used. 'Micro' studies, on the other hand, focus more on language use in relation to the actions and role of individuals. These studies reveal more clearly how speakers exploit their linguistic resources as a means of projecting their social identity. Whereas 'macro' studies reveal shared community norms, only those studies focusing on individual speakers show how the knowledge of these norms is used to achieve particular

< previous page

page_29

next page >

< previous page

page_30

next page > Page 30

effects. Only a handfull of these studies are available for Alsace. The most exhaustive is that of Marguerite Hessini (1981), an Alsatian woman who adopted a participant-observer approach and who recorded and analyzed actual in situ language use. In my analysis, special attention is paid to empirical studies, since they are closest to the study attempted here. This is not to deny the interest and usefulness of the more general studies: they offer an overall picture of the linguistic situation in Alsace, and they are considered here first. A second section takes a detailed look at specific field studies. Both types of studies complement each other. The studies describe various aspects of the Alsatian situation, such as languages in contact (linguistic repertoire); language distribution; school policies, language activism; and language attitudes. Each point is examined below. General Studies Language repertoire in Alsace There are two languages in contact in Alsace: French and German -and two varieties of that German: a mainly oral variety, the dialect, and a written form, High German (Hochdeutsch). French is the official prestige language. It is used in schools and universities, in administrative offices, in courts, and in the news media. The varieties of French spoken in Alsace go from standard French to a regional variety or varieties mostly identifiable by an accent. Alsatian is likely to be spoken in family circles, among friends, in cafés, in some factory workshops, and in senior citizens' clubs. The term 'Alsatian' is ambiguous since it covers a variety of mainly spoken Alemannic and Franconian dialects which are closely related to those dialects spoken in Baden and in the Palatinate (Germany), and to the Swiss German dialects. All these dialects are mutually intelligible. High German, on the other hand, is used almost exclusively for writing. Some Alsatian writers write in High German, and some church services, especially in the Lutheran church, are still conducted in that language. Alsatians also have access to West German television channels and radio programs. But, as a rule, High German is not spoken among Alsatians. Language distribution Lars Olson's 1974 study is insightful and basically still valid in the early 1990s, since many subsequent studies have confirmed his analysis.

< previous page

page_30

next page >

< previous page

page_31

next page > Page 31

Olson notes that four factors correlate with the use of Alsatian: social class, geographical location, age and gender. Social Class Alsatian upper and middle classes use French more than do the workers and agriculturalists. Historically, French has always been used more in the middle and upper strata of society than among the lower classes, because of better educational opportunities and closer connections with the ruling class. Verdoodt, Tabouret-Keller, Philipps, Khettry, Ladin, and Denis & Veltman confirm this observation in present-day Alsace. Ladin for instance, found a correlation between parental occupation and children's first language of socialization. The percentage of children learning Alsatian according to parental occupation is as follows: farmers, 97%; workers, 82%; government employees, 64%; office workers, 64%; service industry, 55%; and professional, 44% (Ladin, 1982: 143). Geographical Location The dialect survives better in rural rather than urban environments. This observation is supported by INSEE figures, and also by the studies of Tabouret-Keller & Luckel, Ladin, and Denis & Veltman. Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) note that 'language change affects rural populations at a much slower rate'. This is important when one considers that the percentage of people who live in rural communities is now less than 16.5%, and only 5% of the active population in Alsace is involved in agriculture (Reynaud & Grafmeyer, 1981:118 and 151). Furthermore, foreign immigration and immigration of monolingual French speakers from the 'Interior,' have caused Alsatians to become a minority in certain districts. For the many foreigners, mainly Turks, Algerians, Black Africans and Yugoslavs, the language to learn is not the dialect, but the more widely used French. As these immigrants settle in Alsace their presence increases the proportion of non-dialect speakers (Lozi, 1983). Related to urbanization is also industrialization. Ladin & Rosenfeld (1979) discovered that in some workshops, the dialect is used between the Alsatian workers, but Neville (1987: 154) claims that 'si dans l'entreprise, on parle encore en dialecte, c'est en français cependant qu'on s'adresse au patron.' In the Mulhouse area, in Chalampé and Ottmarsheim, two large chemical companies and one auto manufacturer constructed plants: thousands of jobs were created and attracted newcomers and their families, many of whom were nondialectophones. Communication with these newcomers on the job, or in the villages where many live, is in French.

< previous page

page_31

next page >

< previous page

page_32

next page > Page 32

Age There are generational differences in the use of the dialect and of French. The younger people favor French, especially when speaking to friends or siblings, but young speakers in rural areas use the dialect more than urban speakers. Neville (1987: 156) notes that 'the younger users of regional languages tend to be militants or people who have consciously decided to use regional languages'. The vast majority of Alsatian speakers today are also French speakers. The older bilinguals are often Alsatian dominant, while the younger ones may feel more at home with French. Indeed, monolingual Alsatian speakers are usually 70 or more years old, which is why Alsatian has sometimes been called 'la langue du troisième âge' (Schmidtlin, 1980). Gender Both Ladin (1982) and Schwendeman (Philipps, 1982: 371) found that girls use the dialect significantly less than do boys (55% against 65%). In their study, Denis & Veltman (1989: 60) found even greater gender differences: 9.1% of boys, versus 1.6% of girls reported generally using Alsatian. Tabouret-Keller (1972: 369) also notes that women use more French with their children than do men, and that the women seem more keenly aware of 'proper' linguistic usage. Neville notes the above variables in language use, and she adds others, which can also be expressed in oppositions: French tends to be a public language, and Alsatian the language of private situations. Not only is the dialect used in private settings, but on occasion, it can function as a 'secret' language, if not a 'subversive' one: 'Le dialecte ... est aujourd'hui la langue écrite de la presse de contre-information, marginale, mais bien vivante, apparue en Alsace depuis quelques années' (quoted in Neville, 1987: 156). Neville (1987: 156) also points out that Alsatian and indeed most regional languages and French are opposed in spoken versus written or printed medium. Educational policies School policies are the subject of much discussion, since their role is considered central in the dissemination of the French language. In fact, Olson notes that the highly centralized school system has worked against regional dialects, especially Alsatian, which is so close to the language of

< previous page

page_32

next page >

< previous page

page_33

next page > Page 33

the long-time enemy. Already in 1918, after Alsace had been German for almost half a century, French had lost ground, and the government was determined to reverse the trend. Non-dialect-speaking teachers and school administrators were recruited in the 'Interior' of France to work in Alsace. Teachers were ordered to use the 'direct' method to teach the national language so that Alsatian children could 'forget a German word each day, in order to learn a French word' (Streicher, 1982: 68). Again, while the teaching of German had been tolerated at most times, it was temporarily stopped in 1945 after another period of German occupation, in order for the French language to regain lost ground. Parents of schoolchildren were told by school officials that the Alsatian dialect was a serious handicap for the learning of French and for acceding to advanced studies. Alsatian was forbidden on the playground. In some kindergarten schools, janitors and other dialect-speaking personnel were explicitely ordered not to talk to the young children (Streicher, 1982: 77). Many dialectophone students were ridiculed or punished for speaking Alsatian. Not until relatively recently, in 1951, did the Deixonne Law officially recognize regional languages in France spelling out their status and their rights (although the so-called langues allogènes, i.e. those spoken in other countries, like Flemish, Corsican and Alsatian, were excluded for a time). The Deixonne Law allowed teachers to have recourse to regional languages under certain conditions, in particular if it made the teaching of French easier (Woehrling, 1983: 51). Teachers were also allowed to spend a total of one hour a week on teaching the local language, at their discretion, and optionally for the student. Only a few students were affected by this law (5% in all of France). A later law, the 1975 Loi Haby providing that 'the teaching of a regional language or culture can be given throughout the school experience of the student,' was likewise never applied. Regional language classes which resulted from the Deixonne Law were poorly funded. Classes were voluntary, and they were scheduled at odd hours. Parents were poorly informed, and teachers' unions were often opposed to the classes. The Savary Circular (Circulaire Savary) of 1982 was much more positive in its wording and spirit: in it, the use of the regional language in kindergarten is encouraged. Three hours a week can be devoted to regional language or culture. And educators are encouraged to bring more interest to the matter of regional language and culture, and to experiment. If the tone of the circular is benevolent, my interviews of educators in the Mulhouse area, in 1987, show that some of the old problems persist: poor pay for teachers, odd hours, etc. Although repeated surveys have shown that parents are in favor of introducing the

< previous page

page_33

next page >

< previous page

page_34

next page > Page 34

study of German in elementary schools, attempts met with little success, since the weekly three hours of teaching of German were not compulsory for students or for teachers. The recent option langue et culture régionales allows students to study both the language and the culture of their region. These programs are still voluntary, take place at odd hours, and usally stress culture rather than language. Still, as Neville (1987: 150) notes, 'regional languages have come a long way in France.' Since 1985 the national teaching diploma, the CAPES (Certificat d'Aptitude Professionnelle à l'Enseignement Secondaire) can now be awarded to students of Breton, and other regional languages can expect to benefit from the same privilege. Vogler and Hug have both examined what language policies should be in Alsace, and reflect two opposite views: Vogler favors the teaching of the dialect, while Hug argues in favor of the teaching of German at an early age. The argument favoring a bilingual education in French/German rather than in French/Alsatian is based on the fact that German gives access to a great language with a broad cultural and literary history, and that the teaching of Alsatian next to French 'has no chance of being taken seriously' (Hessini, 1981: 158). Linguistic arguments in favor of German are its closeness to the Alsatian dialect, its role as a model, a 'reinforcer,' and a potential source of new lexicon. Psychological and attitudinal factors Olson points out that although the dialectal frontier does not correspond to the political frontier between Alsace, Germany and Switzerland, allowing people on either side of the border to understand each other, psychologically, the perception is that Alsatian and German are 'different' (Olson, 1974: 54; Hessini, 1981: 153). A large percentage of dialectophone students interviewed by Ladin (1982: 185) also thought that learning High German was like learning a foreign language. This has been brought out as well by Philipps (1978: 53), and by many articles in Land un Sproch. Olson (1974) further states that 'dans les milieux très patriotes, il vaut mieux s'armer de courage pour dire hautement qu'on parle allemand en Alsace.' He hurries to add, however, that a knowledge of the dialect does not give automatic access to Hochdeutsch, which must be learned in order to use it or even to understand it well (1974: 54). Olson mentions another concern which is echoed in other studies (Philipps, Stauffer, Ladin): noting the consistent decline of the bilingual

< previous page

page_34

next page >

< previous page

page_35

next page > Page 35

German/French editions of the major newspapers in Alsace, he further notes 'the deterioration' of German. He quotes a Swiss journalist who laments Aber was ist das für ein Deutsch, in dem sie geschrieben sind! Ein kümerliches Zwitter-idiom, mit germanischem Wortschatz und romanisher Syntax; ein armselig hilfloses Rudiment aus unbewältigter Grammatik und schiefgeratenem Wortsinn, formlos und scheusslig. (Olson, 1974: 52-5) Olson notes that Alsatian borrows mainly from French. He refers to code-switching as a 'charabia' or a 'Sprachsalat' deplored by 'those who attach importance to the purity of their dialect' (Olson, 1974: 54). Olson mentions that Alsatians born before 1910, who have gone to German-speaking schools, often speak poor French, as do those who were between eight and ten years of age in 1940, who also went to school in German, especially if they have remained in a dialectal environment (Olson, 1974: 52-3). Philipps agrees that many Alsatians are 'de piètres francophones,' i.e. that they speak poor French (Philipps, 1982: 199). Olson argues, as does Philipps, that the result of the Nazi occupation was that many Alsatians favored assimilationist policies. The feeling was 'Rendons l'Alsace française à cent pour cent, faisons table rase du passé.' Alsace was afraid of not appearing French enough (Olson, 1974: 50). Even today, some Alsatians still suffer from an inferiority complex when they compare themselves to 'authentic' Frenchmen. One of the greatest compliments for an Alsatian is to be told that he speaks French 'without an accent,' i.e. without an Alsatian accent. Most Alsatians display a Germanic accent considered as 'distasteful, heavy, guttural, Germanic, utterly unesthetic' by monolingual French speakers, this in contrast to other regional accents, such as 'l'accent du Midi' (the accent of Southern France), which is considered charming, melodic, pleasant, and original (Hessini, 1981: 163). However, a slight accent in speaking French may actually have positive connotations among Alsatians, in order to show solidarity, closeness, or friendliness. But, Olson notes, the younger generations do not share this complex, and they don't constantly question their national identity. They tend to view themselves as living in a French province among other French provinces. Their Frenchness seems more 'natural' than that of their parents or grandparents. Olson mentions the renewed interest in the dialect and in dialect literature. Groups such as the Cercle René Schickele promote dialect maintenance, and they have spearheaded a revival of dialect literature, thus revalidating the dialect. Never has the quality of the writings been so

< previous page

page_35

next page >

< previous page

page_36

next page > Page 36

high as with authors such as Nathan Katz, André Weckmann, and Claude Vigée (Olson, 1974: 61). But as was mentioned by Polomé (class notes), renewed interest in dialect literature has often been an indication that a dialect is endangered. Alsatian and other minority languages The Alsatian situation is mentioned in a number of general studies about minority languages in France. Meic Stephens' chapter on 'The Alsatians' in his work Linguistic Minorities in Western Europe (Stephens, 1976), traces the genesis of the autonomist and language promotion efforts of some groups in Alsace. Lars Olson (1980) examines the assimilationist cultural policy of the French government towards all minority languages, as well as the efforts of language activists in various French regions. Grace Neville's (1986) study deals with the strikingly similar problems shared by all the minority languages of France. She reminds the reader of the linguistic situation in France in the nineteenth century by quoting the dramatic statement of the historian Eugen Weber: The Third Republic found a France in which French was a foreign language for half the citizens ... Until the end of the First World War, the 'langage maternel françois' of Francis I was not that of most French citizens (Weber quoted in Neville, 1987: 148) Neville traces the linguistic policies which have led to general assimilation: Alsace was not the only target for eradication of the dialect. In 1831, the prefect of the Finistère and the Côtes du Nord in Brittany argued: 'It is absolutely necessary to destroy Breton' (Le Menn, 1975:74). In 1846, the prefect of the Basses Pyrénées explained that 'our schools in the Basque Country aim at replacing the Basque language with the French' (Olson, 1980: 377). French authorities in Catalonia supported the work of 'generous and educated men' who furthered the progress of the national language (Bernardo, 1975: 41). Questionable 'pedagogical' methods reported in all regional schools included corporal punishment for speaking the dialect on school grounds, and posters such as 'Soyez propres. Parlez français' (Bernardo, 1975: 40). Indeed, wellmeaning French teachers worked relentlessly and with missionary zeal at eradicating local languages, which were viewed as barbaric and reactionary. Still, most regional language speakers today do not consider themselves to be oppressed or colonized (Olson, 1980: 241).

< previous page

page_36

next page >

< previous page

page_37

next page > Page 37

Neville identifies the problems of teaching regional languages in schools as follows: lack of qualified teachers, dearth of teaching materials, choice of the variety to be taught, and standardization. She does not mention that in Alsace, the problem is even more complex, since the question is not just what variety of Alsatian should be taught which would be difficult enough to agree upon but rather whether Alsatian or High German should be taught. Teachers, linguists, intellectuals are divided on this issue. Neville points out that dialect use can be described in a series of oppositions: dialects survive more in a rural rather than an urban environment; in the more modest classes, rather than in the bourgeoisie; and in private, rather than public settings. She sees the renewed interest in regional languages as a result of the recent recognition that regional dialects are endangered, that they are part of one's linguistic heritage, the seeking of one's roots, or the desire to talk to the older generation. Stauffer (1979: 110) had also mentioned that this new interest in the dialect is related to ecological concerns about clean water and air, and a return to a more natural state. Beer adds another reason for the revival of minority languages in France. He sees the renewed interest for dialects as a consequence of rapid social change, industrialization, modernization, and the introduction of a 'foreign' culture, all of which produce anomie: linguistic activism becomes a vehicle for expressing frustration and dissatisfaction (Beer, 1980: 89, 98, 111). Language activism Only since the 1960s have some Alsatians become aware of the shift towards French, voicing concern for the survival of the dialect. They have joined other minorities in France such as the Bretons, the Basques, the Flemish, the Corsicans, the Provençaux, and the Catalans in actively promoting language maintenance. They have achieved some results, but they have not attracted the participation of the population in general. Yet, the example and the achievements of other minority language activists in France is undeniably an inspiration and an encouragement. Mentioning the successful creation of Breton, Catalan, and Basque bilingual schools, Thomas Meyer (1987) asks 'Why not us?' As was mentioned earlier, the Cercle René Schickele is the best-known and the best-organized group in Alsace. The Cercle publishes a quarterly

< previous page

page_37

next page >

< previous page

page_38

next page > Page 38

magazine Land un Sproch, which contains informative articles in French, in High German, and in the dialect. Other publications supporting bilingualism are Elan, L'ami du peuple, and Rot un Wiss. Language maintenance groups are very much aware of the change of identity, away from Germanness, which has taken place in Alsace. Since ethnic and linguistic boundaries in French society are tending to disappear, much of the activity of these groups is devoted to preserving and enhancing Alsatian distinctiveness, and making people aware of their common historical and cultural background. Dialect promotion groups sponsor plays and radio programs in Alsatian, as well as regional music and folklore festivals; they offer classes in Alsatian, as well as courses on Alsatian culture. They view their role as a movement to sensitize and educate the population. Supporters of dialect maintenance are also asking for official recognition of both the dialect and its written form, High German, in order to create a more receptive and favorable climate for the maintenance of Alsatian. Because history and the French educational systems have combined to increase the perceived distance between standard German and Alsatian, the Cercle René Schikele started a campaign to encourage students in the sixième (the sixth grade, when the learning of a foreign language becomes compulsory) to choose German rather than English. Arguments in favor of German are its closeness to the Alsatian dialect and its role as a model, a 'reinforcer,' and a potential source of new lexicon. Alsatian speakers are or should be, from a strictly linguistic point of view able to master High German well. Commercial and cultural exchanges with Germany and Switzerland are also mentioned as reasons for the learning of High German. Alsatian promotion groups are thus trying to point out that the knowledge of German and not just French may be a means of achieving upward social mobility, at least in Alsace. This is reminiscent of the situation in Wales, where some parents of school children think that the knowledge of Welsh will create wider job opportunities for their children, and where language activists can use this belief to foster language loyalty and maintenance (Thomas, 1980: 158). But in spite of these arguments, English is gaining ground as a first foreign language in Alsace. Occasionally, demands by language activists become harsher and more defiant: in order to achieve greater use of Alsatian in more situations, some recommend the tactic that Alsatians demand that representatives of the French government, policemen, government workers or judges address them in the dialect (Land un Sproch, 1986, Nb. 1-2). Most Alsatians

< previous page

page_38

next page >

< previous page

page_39

next page > Page 39

seem to regard this prescription as a rather extreme position, however. Beer, in his investigation of language activism in France since World War II, proposes the following theory: there is a correlation between economic development of an area and ethnic political militancy, i.e. the higher the degree of economic development of an area, the lower the level of political militancy. Indeed, Alsace was ranked first of the seven ethnic regions for average annual income, and there is relatively little discontent there (compared to Corsica or Brittany, which have more depressed economies). In areas which are not as well off, discontent was more likely to be expressed in violence. He further states that rising expectations and rapid social change in the areas which were farthest behind are disrupting social structure and leading to anomie. And anomie is used as an explanation of individual activists' motivation for militancy. 1 Charles Stauffer's (1979) L'Alsacien et son dialecte, while also pleading for dialect survival and revival, takes a somewhat more sentimental and nostalgic approach to the dialect. Referring to those young Alsatians who regret having grown up without learning the dialect, Stauffer says that à un langage conventionnel et abstrait [i.e. French], aux clichés à la mode, à tout ce déferlement de mots qui sonnent creux, ils voudraient substituer une langue vraie, et originale, expressive, créatrice (Stauffer, 1979:9 emphasis mine) He does point out that the dialect is a worthy language, 'une langue au sens plein du mot' (Stauffs, 1979: 49). This is not an unnecessary reminder in France, where the patois ideology has perpetuated the cliché that patois -or dialects are uncultured language varieties. Haarmann mentions that since patois or dialect speakers live in the provinces, away from centers of French culture, 'such an evaluation has for a long time exerted a strong influence on the self identification of minorities in France,' producing a sort of 'collective inferiority complex' (Haarmann, 1986: 92). Field Studies This section takes a detailed look at several significant studies. Although each takes a different approach to the problem of language choice and language use in Alsace, together they reveal some interesting trends.

< previous page

page_39

next page >

< previous page

page_40

next page > Page 40

Hessini (1981) Hessini gives a detailed account of the statistical surveys carried out by the INSEE. The figures provided by the surveys in 1962 and 1979 must be viewed with caution since they were not meant to be linguistic surveys. The 1962 survey was part of a census which asked what language(s) were spoken by the respondents: French, German or the dialect? In 1979, the aim of the survey was to study social behavior and life style in Alsace and the questions were: 'Speaks Alsatian? Yes/no' and 'Understands Alsatian? Yes/no' (Hessini, 1981: 62). Nowhere do the questionnaires specify what is meant by 'knowing,' 'understanding,' or 'speaking.' Nor was it clear what 'dialecte' referred to, since there are also French patois spoken in some Alsatian valleys in the Vosges and in some villages in the Belfort Gap. All the data reflect self reports, and actual language use was never observed, or proficiency tested. Furthermore, the 1979 survey may distort the picture, since it only takes into account Alsatians over 15 years of age, at a time when French has become the mother tongue of many Alsatian children. Some answers, therefore, may be more indicative of attitudes towards the languages in Alsace, rather than an accurate picture of actual language use. Still, these studies do provide valuable information about trends, and they confirm the intuition and observations of students of the Alsatian situation. Some of the INSEE results are worth mentioning here. It appears that a healthy number of Alsatians still speak the dialect, but that reported knowledge has dipped between 1962 and 1979 as shown in Table 1. It also appears that dialect use is more prevalent in the Bas-Rhin than in the Haut-Rhin. Table 2 shows that the use of dialect according to age reveals clear generational differences. INSEE figures from 1946 and 1962 are not reproduced here, but they show clearly that it is through the schools that French was acquired during that period (Hessini, 1981: 66). The 1979 INSEE survey also investigates the use of the dialect according to geographical area. In rural areas it is higher (88%) than in the large urban centers (69%). In Strasbourg the percentage goes down even further to 62%. Hessini finds this to have been caused by the greater influx of monolingual French speakers in urban centers, the tendency for highly educated persons to live in cities, and the choice of some speakers not to use the dialect 'for reasons of prestige, social stigma, or political choice' (Hessini, 1981: 66). One may add to this that, in recent years, there has

< previous page

page_40

next page >

< previous page

page_41

next page > Page 41

also been an influx of foreign workers who make up a large percentage of the population in some areas. As pointed out before, these foreign workers TABLE 1 Departmental distribution of speakers of Alsatian, over 15 years old, in % Speak Alsatian

Department Bas-Rhin

Understand don't Don't speak understand

196288

*

197977

7

Haut-Rhin 196286

*

197973

9

196282

*

197975

8

Alsace

16 18 17

* Question not asked in 1962 Source: Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques (INSEE). Quoted in Hessini, 1981: 62. TABLE 2 Distribution of Alsatian speakers according to age (persons over 15 years of age), in % Age

Speak Alsatian*

Understand don't speak

Don't understand

16-24 66

83

13

21

25-34 64

90

11

25

35-44 71

93

9

20

45-54 84

96

5

11

55-64 84

97

5

11

65-74 88

98

4

8

over 75

96

2

10

88

* % of speakers of Alsatian origin Source: INSEE. Quoted in Hessini, 1981: 64. and their children do not usually learn Alsatian, but French. With greater heterogeneity of the population also comes a greater number of 'mixed' marriages, which have a bearing on what language is spoken at home, and ultimately what language is learned by the children. Whereas 92% of respondents in marriages where both spouses are Alsatian report speaking Alsatian, this percentage goes down to 57% where only one of the spouses is a speaker of Alsatian. The INSEE study also attempted to discover dialect usage in four domains: at home, while shopping, in public administration offices, and

< previous page

page_41

next page >

< previous page

page_42

next page > Page 42

in the workplace. The data indicate at least some overall trends: Alsatian is used most often in the family, and least often in administrative offices (Hessini, 1981: 72). Around 75% of the active labor force reported using the dialect at work often, or fairly often. Of those, 33% reported that the use of Alsatian was necessary in their profession, 30% considered the dialect useful, and 37% felt that it was neither necessary nor useful (Hessini, 1981: 72). Queried about their knowledge of standard German, nine out of ten heads of households of Alsatian origin reported speaking German. Furthermore, German is known more in rural areas than in urban centers. In the Haut-Rhin, for instance, 67% of the rural population reported being able to speak and write in German, while the percentage was 54% in urban centers (10,000 to 50,000 inhabitants). One suspects that the percentage would go down even further in cities like Mulhouse and Colmar. However, Hessini warns that the actual level of proficiency of standard German among Alsatians is often very questionable, mainly among the younger generation. Their declared knowledge of spoken German may be very elementary, and prove inadequate when put to the test (Hessini, 1981: 74). Perhaps Hessini's greatest contribution is that she recorded actual linguistic behavior and provides transcripts of naturally occurring conversations. For the fact that it is through everyday discourse that social roles are sustained and recognized, means that sociolinguistics must be based partly, in Stubbs' (1983: 7) words, 'on analyses of how people actually talk'. Ladin (1982) An extensive and rigorous study was carried out by Wolfgang Ladin, an Austrian scholar, who surveyed 791 high school students in the troisième (ninth year of school, ages 14-16) from 15 different schools in Strasbourg and its surrounding towns. This number represented roughly 15% of the total troisième school population in the area. Only dialectophone students were asked to fill out the questionnaires. Anyone was considered a dialectophone if he or she completed, at least partly, a questionnaire testing competence of the students in Alsatian. It appears that the standards for 'dialectophone' students were minimal. Ladin's aim was basically to discover who speaks what to whom, where, and when. His questionnaire is a very detailed 65-item form on demographic information, language use, and language attitudes. His results show that several factors seem associated with the use of Alsatian and or French.

< previous page

page_42

next page >

< previous page

page_43

next page > Page 43

TABLE 3 Language use in family (in percentages of respondents) Alsatian Alsatian + French French Mother to respondent

49

40

10

Respondent to mother

62

2

36

Father to respondent

53

20

27

Respondent to father

64

1

35

Parents to each other

83

4

12

Respondent to siblings

34

23

42

Respondent to grandparents*

76

13

Respondent's parents to grandparents*88

6

3

* In these cases, there were additional categories: 1.55% of the parents used Alsatian + German with their parents; and 1.24% of the respondents used Alsatian + German, and another 1.08% just German, with their grandparents. In the domain of family or friendship, while 61% of the respondents still used Alsatian in addressing their parents, and while the vast majority of parents used Alsatian with each other, the number of students who used Alsatian with their siblings dropped sharply to 34%. The percentage of students who report using Alsatian and French with their parents is surprisingly high, especially since the same respondents claimed that their parents used code-switching to address them in 30% of the cases (Table 3). Ladin notes that there seems to be a discrepancy, but does not attempt to explain it. It could be, however, that students have been discouraged or ridiculed in school for code-switching. Concerns about 'correctness,' 'logic,' or 'consistency' instilled in the schools could be preventing students from code-switching or at least admitting that they do. Most of my own informants seem to regard code-switching as 'bad,' 'messy,' a corrupted, careless or undesirable way of speaking. The use of Alsatian between family members drops when they are taking a walk in town, or when monolingual French speakers are present. In the domain of the family, gender and geographical origin seem to affect the choice of Alsatian. Among the students who report using Alsatian with their siblings, the boys (40%) outnumber the girls (29%). Informants from a big city like Strasbourg use the dialect in conversing with their brothers and sisters in only 6% of cases. And in this same group which reported using Alsatian with brothers and sisters, 53% came from working families as against 5% from middle and upper-class families. Ladin also discovered that parents use the dialect more with older siblings than with younger ones.

< previous page

page_43

next page >

< previous page

page_44

next page > Page 44

In the domain of the interior monologue, 51% of the students reported thinking in French while performing a physical or manual task, such as gardening, crafts, cleaning, or shopping; 33% per cent carried out such tasks in Alsatian, and 16% in French + Alsatian. In abstract tasks, however, 79% of the informants think in French, 8% in Alsatian and French, and 13% in Alsatian. Mental calculations are done in French in 94% of the cases, and in Alsatian in only 2% of them. French was seen as the language of feelings by 87% of respondents, and girls were twice as likely to express their feelings in French than were the boys. However, Alsatian was perceived as the language of humor (66% of respondents) as compared to French (24%). If given a choice between a religious service in French and one in German, 91% of the respondents preferred French, but 66% would welcome services in Alsatian. In spite of the preference for French services, 15% of the students preferred German Christmas songs. In the public domain, the more formal the situation, the less the dialect is used. While 45% of the students speak Alsatian at the local bakery, the percentage goes down to 11% in a big department store (with 5% of the informants using a 'mixture.' In the post office or at the bank, French also dominates: only 6% of the students report using the dialect in the post office, and 5% at the bank. While looking for a job, most students would use French (91%). In general, when meeting a stranger, dialog is in French except with elderly persons, whom 56% of students would address in the dialect. Reporting an accident to a police officer would be done in French by 89% of the respondents; only 4% would use Alsatian. In the domain of leisure and culture, most students (81%) read French newspapers, yet when they have access to bilingual newspapers, 65% read some of the articles printed in German. Literature in Alsatian does not hold much interest for the respondents: 78% have never read a book in Alsatian. Yet, 56% liked folk songs in Alsatian, which often focus on ecological and regional concerns, as well as the problem of rootlessness in modern society. The bilingual editions of newspapers have experienced a steady decline, with a concurrent increase in French editions. Hessini quotes the figures in Table 4 for the largest paper in Alsace, the Dernières Nouvelles d'Alsace (1981: 81). Young Alsatians have a particularly rich range of radio and television stations to choose from: French, German, Swiss and Luxemburgish. In

< previous page

page_44

next page >

< previous page

page_45

next page > Page 45

TABLE 4 Percentage of bilingual/French editions of Dernières Nouvelles d'Alasce 1945

1970

1971

1979

French edition

16.9

49.78

52.46

70.03

Bilingual edition

83.1

50.22

47.54

29.97

Source: Hessini, 1981:81 general, most students watched French programs, and when they did watch German programs, they tended to be sports or variety shows, which made minimal linguistic demands on the viewers. Most respondents (88%) explained that their choice of program was determined primarily by the quality of the program, followed by informative or instructional content (8%), and lastly by language (4%). Most respondents watched French newscasts exclusively (76%), and only 2% watched the German 'Tagesschau' or 'Heute.' Attitudes towards the dialect are ambiguous and somewhat contradictory. While 88% of respondents view Alsatian as a cultural heritage which they would like to pass on to their children, 43% believe that one can feel Alsatian without speaking the dialect (compare Trudgill (1983), the case of Arvanitika). The dialect is also viewed as a hindrance for achieving a good knowledge of French. Furthermore, 77% see an accent as the most salient characteristic of Alsatian French, and 14% also think that the French vocabulary of Alsatian speakers is not as rich as that of monolingual speakers. In spite of the foregoing, 47% of the students think that one can express anything in Alsatian. Yet, only 32% believe that French classical writers like Molière or La Fontaine could be satisfactorily translated into Alsatian (in fact such translations do exist, and Mr Willy Willenbucher, an Alsatian playwright, has translated Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme). Popular songs such as those of Maxime Le Forestier, however, were considered as more 'translatable,' i.e. they would not lose their beauty, expressivity and originality in Alsatian. In spite of the low interest in literature in the dialect, 71% consider that orthographical standardization is desirable and useful, and 52% think that this orthography will be close to Hochdeutsch. Most respondents consider that their knowledge of German will be useful to them in the exercise of their future profession, but only 40% of them wish that they had started studying it in school earlier. Ladin notes that the purely 'utilitarian' reasons given about the usefulness of German account for the smaller percentage for the usefulness of Alsatian (68%).

< previous page

page_45

next page >

< previous page

page_46

next page > Page 46

Hartung (1586) notes that practical, utilitarian (i.e. economic) motives seem to outweigh the sentimental, historical and cultural ones. This type of behavior is also reported in many other minority language situations studied by Edwards (1985). Still, 80% of the respondents think that those who live in Alsace but do not speak the dialect ought to make the effort to learn it. Interestingly, 54% of the students reported that passing from Alsatian to Hochdeutsch is like going to a foreign language. This brings out a perception of distance which, linguistically speaking, is not there. Ladin considers it astonishing that 34% of the respondents are convinced that they use the dialect more than 50% of the time; that 38% think that they use French and the dialect about equally, and only 29% recognize that they use the dialect less than 50% of the time. Students think that their proficiency in Alsatian is about equal to their parents' (535), but 44% feel their proficiency to be lower, and 3% higher. Most students (62%) are confident that they would be able to translate the content of a history lecture into Alsatian without particular difficulties. Actually, while Ladin gave his subjects a proficiency test, he does not, regrettably, go into detail about the results. He only mentions that, in order to be considered a dialectophone, students had to perform at a minimal level. Ladins's conclusions seem to agree with the INSEE study that urban versus rural dwelling determines the use of the dialect. In the cities, the use of French always rose in all categories and situations. In the small towns, Alsatian was used more overall. The 'frontier' seems to go through the moderately sized towns. The reasons for this, according to Ladin, reflect a combination of social, political and economic processes: the urbanization of Alsace depends directly upon the central government and Paris, thus encouraging the use of French in administrative and industrial circles. But some economic trends may actually be helping the dialect: the implantation of middle and small German industries in rural Alsace, and the 35,000 Alsatians who cross the German and Swiss borders daily in order to work there, may have a stabilizing effect on rural areas, by making the dialect more useful (Ladin, 1982: 187). The second most important factor which seems to influence the use of the dialect is sex: in all situations, girls reported using the dialect less than did the boys. This was also noticed by Tabouret-Keller & Luckel, by Trudgill, and Denis & Veltman. Ladin explains that French is the language of prestige, of fashions, elegant living, and refinement, and women may be more sensitive to these characteristics. Most women also find work in

< previous page

page_46

next page >

< previous page

page_47

next page > Page 47

the service industry, which is dominated by French (Ladin, 1982: 188). Women traditionally have been at home, and more closely connected with the upbringing of their children. They help them with their homework, and they confer with teachers. They know from everyday experience the importance of a good command of French for their children's future educational and employment opportunities. Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) surveyed 106 respondents, living in 44 distinct rural localities in the Bas-Rhin. Questionnaires were administered to informants who were queried about personal data and linguistic use. Informants included 73 men and 33 women. All were divided in three age categories: 56 years old and older, 31 to 55, and those who were less than 30. Roughly one-third of the informants were employed in agriculture, but there were also a number of former farmers who had changed professions, and who were now working in banks, as functionaries, or who had opened small businesses. The questionnaire focused on linguistic usage in the family or in the neighborhood. The researchers tested the hypothesis that rural areas are linguistically more conservative, as well as the assertion, made in various studies, that the family is the stronghold of threatened language varieties. Table 5 tabulates the responses to a question pertaining to ability to speak Alsatian, French and German: 84.6% of the respondents reported that they could speak Alsatian fluently, compared to 100% for both the middle-aged and the older generations. For French, however, there was a distinct difference between generations: 92% of the young group spoke French, compared to 77.7% for the middle group, and 45.7% for the older group. German was spoken by more than half of the the young people, but less so than the middle-aged group (64.4%), and the older group (65.7%). Tabouret-Keller & Luckel do not say so, but many of the over 31-year-olds had gone to German school during the pre1918 and post-1945 periods, which may account partly for the high knowledge of German. Age distinctions were evident again, in reading and writing these three language varieties, with young people most proficient in French and the older generation least proficient in French. Interestingly, no group was proficient in the reading or writing of Alsatian which reflects the fact that the written medium corresponding to Alsatian has traditionally been

< previous page

page_47

next page >

< previous page

page_48

next page > Page 48

TABLE 5 Percentages of respondents who can speak Alsatian, French and German fluently, in % Alsatian

French

German

Young

84.6

92.0

54.0

Middle-aged

100.0

77.7

64.4

Older

100.0

45.7

65.7

Total

96.0

70.7

62.0

Source: Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) Hochdeutsch. Within the family, the use of Alsatian was still very prevalent, as well as what respondents themselves qualified as a 'mixture [mélange] of French and Alsatian.' Hochdeutsch is never mentioned in these answers as a spoken language in the family. The dialect is especially used between adults (80% of the cases), between husbands and wives and between middle-aged children and their parents. Alsatian talk to children is statistically lower 46% and 68%), but is not necessarily replaced by French only, but by a mixture of French and Alsatian. Where the use of Alsatian is the lowest is among children between themselves where the use of the dialect falls to 25%. In their conclusions, Tabouret-Keller & Luckel assert that older speakers use Alsatian more often, whereas younger speakers tend to use French. The 31-55 group, however, show a behavior which is between the older and the younger group: within the family, they use the dialect to address the older generation, while they use a significant amount of French, and also a 'mixture of French and Alsatian' to address their children. The presence of children engenders the use of French. They conclude that the family does not constitute the homogeneous domain which it is often made out to be. Still, their conclusion is that Alsatian remains dominant in the older and middle-aged generation, in family and social relations in the village. Within the younger group (30 years and less), the use of French seems to be 'parallel' to that of the dialect, and code-switching may also be more prevalent: 'le passage de l'un à l'autre language semble s'opéer, par comparaison avec les autres générations avec plus de de facilité' (Tabouret-Keller & Luckel, 1981: 60). Among neigbors and acquaintances, Alsatian dominates in the neighborhood, and at the village stores but French is also used as soon as one of the interlocutors is the mayor, the priest, the pastor, the local gendarme, or even the mailman. Interestingly, French is used more

< previous page

page_48

next page >

< previous page

page_49

next page > Page 49

often with the schoolteacher on the school grounds than on the street. Tabouret-Keller & Luckel think that speaking French to the schoolteacher on the school grounds is due to attention to his social and institutional role, since school is associated with French only. Similarly, the gendarme is often Francophone; furthermore, his status as a representative of the state encourages the use of French. Surprisingly, Tabouret-Keller & Luckel conclude that Alsatian is used more in social relationships (friends, neighbors, etc.) than in the family. An interesting point of methodology is that the investigator conducting the interview of respondents did not mention at first the languages used in the community, and that in every instance, the respondents themselves used the terms Alsatian, French, a 'mixture' (of French and Alsatian) and German. Cole (1975) Roger Cole's study polled student attitudes towards the dialect in Munster, a small town in the Haut-Rhin, in order to determine what changes take place as the students get older. He administered questionnaires to 293 informants aged 1118, but the 17-18 group, only 3% of the respondents, was too small to be usable in the opinion survey. Cole compares these students responses to a broader population sample from other areas of Alsace (Haut-Rhin, Bas-Rhin). Interesting differences showed up in student age categories, as tabulated in Table 6. Asked to evaluate whether they spoke Alsatian to their parents frequently, sometimes, or rarely, 65.9% of the 11-12-year-old students replied frequently, compared to 63.6% for the 13-14 group, and only 47.9% for the 15-16 group. The same observation was true for talk to siblings: 60.2% of the 11-12 group used Alsatian often, as compared to 43.5% for the 13-14 group, and only 27.1% for the 15-16 group. As the children became older, they spoke Alsatian less often with their parents and with their siblings. Younger respondents also perceived their parents and themselves as speaking Alsatian more frequently than the older groups. Cole offers interesting insights which are also suggested in the Tabouret-Keller & Luckel study: that the older children determine the language that is spoken in the home. They choose to speak predominantly French with their parents:

< previous page

page_49

next page >

< previous page

page_50

next page > Page 50

TABLE 6 Students speaking Alsatian frequently, in % Age 11 - 12

Age 13 - 14

Age 15-16

To parents

65.9

63.6

47.9

To siblings

60.2

43.5

27.1

This does not take place as a result of mutual agreement, so much as it happens because children fifteen years of age are now in better command of their second register, French, than they are of Alsatian. Parents will meet the challenge to speak predominantly French rather than use parental authority to force their children to speak Alsatian. (Cole 1975: 297) The use of Alsatian outside the home follows the preceding age patterns, with the 11-12 group frequently using Alsatian with friends and relatives from the same area (52.5% of the respondents), while the percentage is down to 22.9% for the 15-16 year group. The youngest group reported that they frequently spoke to Alsatian-speaking strangers in Alsatian (27.3%), whereas the 15-16 group was more likely to use French: only 8.3% would use the dialect frequently to speak to Alsatian-speaking strangers. Alsatian usage at school with schoolmates also diminished with age (28.4% for age 11-12, 26.0% for age 13-14, and 6.3% for age 15-16). In general, the younger the respondent, the greater the likelihood to use Alsatian. Also, the parents were the people with whom they were most likely to use the dialect. Younger speakers were more likely than the older groups to perceive their proficiency in Alsatian as excellent or good. There is, however, a reversal of the pattern when it comes to speaking and understanding German. While speaking proficiency is lower than comprehension for all groups, the older group was more inclined to rate its proficiency as good, with the 13-14 year olds rating themselves the highest. Most respondents preferred to be identified as both Alsatian and French. They were aware that the dialect was spoken less and less, but there was no concern that the dialect might become extinct. The overwhelming majority thought that it was important to be able to speak and understand the dialect. And most considered it the responsibility of parents to teach their children, rather than that of the schools, although most of the 11-18-year-olds felt that the government should foster the use of the dialect.

< previous page

page_50

next page >

< previous page

page_51

next page > Page 51

While most of the respondents of all age groups preferred to be identified as both French and Alsatian, about 10-15% in every age category (not just among the students, but in the broader sample) indicated a preference for being identified solely as French. It is noteworthy that the highest percentage in that group were the 50-and-over group, which chose this answer in 21.4% of the cases. Approximately 10-15% of the respondents in all categories said that they did not want their children to learn Alsatian. And about two-thirds of those 10-15% were females (302). Khettry (1982) Whereas Cole's study concerns a small town in a rural area, Françoise Khettry compares rural and urban respondents. She is particularly interested in discovering linguistic usage, in the family on the one hand, and in the neighborhood and schools on the other hand, and in analyzing the respective roles of these domains in the Frenchification of the subjects. Also studied is the correlation between social class background, and urban/rural origins in the pattern of acquisition of French. Her study was carried out in Mulhouse, the largest urban center of the Haut-Rhin, and in Soultz, a small rural town 25 km from Mulhouse. Respondents were 15-18-year-old students, whose parents were both Alsatian speakers. Sex and age were not variables in this study. The number of respondents was 52 in Soultz and 44 subjects in Mulhouse. Respondents were divided into two-social class groups: Group I were the children of middle-class parents, i.e. teachers, managerial professions, people with small businesses, and sales personnel. Group II was made up of children of workers, craftsmen, miners, mechanics, etc. The number of upper-class backgrounds was too insignificant to be included in the study. In a first analysis, social status was not considered, nor was rural/urban background. To the question 'What language do your parents speak between themselves?', 59.5% of the parents (according to student responses) spoke Alsatian, 32% used both Alsatian and French, while only 8.5% use French. To the question 'What language do you speak with your parents?', 39.5% spoke both French and Alsatian, 35.5% spoke only French, and only 25% of parent/children communication was solely in Alsatian. While the majority of parents spoke Alsatian together, when they addressed their children, their use of French quadrupled. The use of a mixture of French and Alsatian also went up, at the expense of the

< previous page

page_51

next page >

< previous page

page_52

next page > Page 52

exclusive use of Alsatian. Khettry attributes these differences in the use of the dialect to the fact that some parents are aware of the importance of French for the future socioeconomic success of their children, or they fear that an Alsatian accent in French will hamper them later. The use of bilingual communication, she thinks, may be a compromise solution for parents who want socioeconomic success for their children, but also want to transmit their dialect; or perhaps they realize that in a border area with Germany and Switzerland, a knowledge of the dialect will facilitate the learning of German, and thus give their children an added advantage in business for instance. In the neighborhood, 58% of the respondents used French, with 23% using both French and Alsatian, and 19% using only Alsatian. In school, 77% of the students spoke French, 23% spoke both French and Alsatian, while the exclusive use of Alsatian in school was totally absent. The domains of neighborhood and school are distinctly less favorable for the use of the dialect, then. Khettry notes that, in spite of the high percentage of use of the dialect between spouses (almost 60% of the cases), in reality three-quarters of the parents are Frenchified, since they use French or French and Alsatian in speaking to their children. She, like Cole and Tabouret-Keller & Luckel, notes that children, who spend much time in the French ambiance of the schools, probably play a role in the increasing usage of French in the family (Khettry, 1982: 475). In fact, she concludes that schools and the family play roles which are roughly equal in Frenchifying the children, but in a different way: qualitatively for the schools, quantitatively in the family. In taking into consideration social class and urban/rural background, parents from the middle-class group are more Frenchified (62.5% in Soultz, 66.6% in Mulhouse) than those of the lower socioeconomic group (32% in Soultz, versus 33.3%). Here, the determining factor seems to be social class rather than urban or rural origin. In communication between parents and children, again the same trends are visible, and social class rather than urban/rural background are determinant. The percentage of Frenchified parents in Group I (the middle class) is 87.5% in Soultz, and 100% in Mulhouse; while the percentage of Frenchified parents in group II (the working class) is 67% both in Soultz and in Mulhouse. The proportion of middle-class Frenchified parents is greater in Mulhouse than in Soultz. In the neighborhood, the percentage of Frenchified middle-class young people is roughly the same in Soultz and in Mulhouse, 87.5% versus 85.5%, but for the lower socioeconomic students the percentage of Frenchified students is much higher in Mulhouse (93.5%), than in Soultz

< previous page

page_52

next page >

< previous page

page_53

next page > Page 53

(67%). Khettry attributes this to the greater use of French in city neighborhoods, and the greater pressure on students to conform to the norm. In the schools, most students use French exclusively whatever their social or geographic background. However, the percentage of students communicating in both French and Alsatian is higher in Soultz (27%), than in Mulhouse (19%). Khettry concludes that the family is the principal agent of acculturation in the Alsatian middle class. For the lower classes, however, the process of acculturation seems to depend to a significant extent on communication in the neighborhood and school in the urban environment, and more on the school in the rural environment (Khettry, 1982: 482). Statistical Analyses Veltman (1983) Calvin Veltman's study is based on 1980 INSEE statistics. His aim is to measure the scale on which the dialect is receding within the family, in particular by comparing the linguistic behavior of parents with that of their children. Since previous studies had shown that there was a difference between use of Alsatian in rural versus urban areas, this variable was also studied. The figures published by the INSEE in 1980 sampled all the heads of households aged 25-64 who had children living with them at home. Results show that an average of 62.2% of couples speak Alsatian in Alsace, but the percentage is higher in rural areas (82.5%) than in urban areas (54.1%). Furthermore, 15.9% of couples comprise only one Alsatian speaker, and in 27.5% of the cases neither of the spouses speaks the dialect. Allowing for the couples where at least one spouse is a dialectophone, the percentage of Alsatians who speak the dialect in Alsace is 70.2% (this is only for couples with one or more child(ren). Again, a difference between rural and urban areas appears: in rural areas, 87.3% of the sampled population speak Alsatian; in the cities, this percentage goes down to 63.4%. Veltman hypothesized that parents' competence in Alsatian would affect the linguistic behavior of their children. This is, in fact, the case. An average of 52.4% of the children sampled (those with parents between the ages of 25 and 54) were reported to speak Alsatian in Alsace as a

< previous page

page_53

next page >

< previous page

page_54

next page > Page 54

whole. Here, the contrast between rural and urban children is dramatic: 81.6% of rural children speak the dialect whereas only 40.7% of urban children do. Since for all of Alsace, 70.2% of the parents spoke Alsatian, while only 52.4% of their children did, there is a significant loss from one generation to the next (25.3%). When contrasting rural versus urban speakers, the rate of loss is 6.5% in rural areas (1 - (81.6/87.3) = 6.5%). The urban situation is very different, with a rate of loss of 35.8% (1 -(40.7/63.4) = 35.8%)(Veltman, 1983: 129). In addition, looking at families formed by mixed couples (where one spouse does not speak Alsatian) and their children, the rate of loss reaches 63.6% when the mother does not know the dialect. The rate of loss is 48.7% when the mother does speak the dialect and the father does not. Again, when a distinction is made between rural and urban data, loss of Alsatian in children of interlinguistic marriages is greatest for children of urban families, and in families where the mother is the one who does not speak the dialect. Veltman notes that 11.6% of children in families where neither parent speaks the dialect still learn the dialect anyway, at least in rural areas. In cities, 99.8% of children of nondialectophone parents do not learn the dialect. As Veltman himself notes, this study is only suggestive, since the survey asked 'Who speaks Alsatian?' Respondents were not tested for proficiency. Therefore, it is hard to say whether the respondents who claimed to speak Alsatian spoke it well or poorly, how often, and in what circumstances. Veltman comments that in a context of assimilation such as Alsace, it is probable that the competence of parents is much greater than that of their children. Furthermore, this study did not reflect any differences in the ages of the children, but it is probable that the younger the child, the harder it is for the child to speak Alsatian fluently (Veltman, 1983: 132). Denis (1985) Another statistical study, which is pessimistic for the future of Alsatian, is the 1985 work by Marie-Noële Denis. Her aim is to measure the evolution of the use of Alsatian, and to determine the prospects for its survival. While she notices that the increase in the knowledge of French was already noticeable in 1830 and in 1860, her census figures go from 1878 to 1979. The percentage of respondents who claimed to speak the dialect remained roughly the same in the BasRhin during the 1878-1910 era (around 95.5%), but the proportion of dialect speakers increased from

< previous page

page_54

next page >

< previous page

page_55

next page > Page 55

78.7% to 93% in the Haut-Rhin during the same period. Between 1926 and 1962, the percentage of Alsatian speakers for all of Alsace actually increased from 80.0% to 87.3%. But in 1979, the overall percentage of Alsatian speakers for all Alsace had declined to 74.7% (76.5% in the Bas-Rhin versus 72.3% in the Haut-Rhin). For all of Alsace, then, the loss during the 17 years between 1962 and 1979, is 12.6% for persons 15 years and older who answered the questionnaire. As early as 1946, the dialect was used less in Strasbourg than in other areas of Alsace, and by 1962, all the urban areas showed that less Alsatian was spoken there than in rural areas. In the Haut-Rhin for instance, 82.9% of respondents living in rural areas spoke Alsatian in 1979 against 65.9% in the Mulhouse area. Denis notes that a steady rural exodus to the cities at least until 1975 is another factor threatening the dialect. Often, the drop in the use of Alsatian among urban populations can be attributed to an influx of non-dialect speakers from other French regions or of foreigners. As might be expected, the dialect is mostly used by people whose parents or spouses are both Alsatian speakers (91.8% of the cases). The use of Alsatian goes down in mixed families (57.5%); it is 13.5% for families from the 'Interior;' and it is 8.7% for foreign families (these last figures seem very high). Denis also notes that age becomes a greater predictor of Alsatian usage starting with the 1962 census. When only Alsatian-speaking couples are considered, there is a clear lack of transmission of the dialect by younger parents to their children. In 1979 63.3% of the sample population spoke Alsatian as against 40.7% of their children. The rate of loss of use is therefore 35.7%. From these figures, and from the fact that the percentage of children who speak Alsatian when their parents do not speak it, is negligible (0.2%), she calculates that, in 25 years, the loss of the use of Alsatian among the children of the present generation of children of the 25-54-year-old heads of households will be 14.5% Denis then points out that, based on figures available and on the trends observed (that children of Frenchified parents no longer learn the dialect), 73.8% of the third generation will no longer speak Alsatian (59.3% + 14.5% = 73.8%). While statistical projections of this type are highly abstract, and cannot foresee some of the changes that might occur, they at least show that once the mechanism of assimilation has started, it acquires a momentum of its own, and it quantifies what we grasp intuitively: that parents who do not speak a language are not likely to pass it on to their children.

< previous page

page_55

next page >

< previous page

page_56

next page > Page 56

Denis & Veltman (1989) In their book entitled Le déclin du dialecte alsacien (1989), Denis & Veltman give an excellent up-to-date description of language use in Alsace, which confirms their previous research. Their sample of 2,216 students, aged from 14 to 17 years, is very impressive and, unlike any other study, it covers all of Alsace (although a majority of the lycées they visited were situated in the Bas-Rhin). Language choice in Alsatian families was compared with language choice/use in monolingual French and foreign families. Not surprisingly, they found that Alsatian families used the dialect the most (but more French from the 'Interior' were willing to learn the dialect than foreigners). Their questionnaire included questions on frequency of Alsatian use (exlusive or quasi-exclusive use of the dialect, bilingualism with French or Alsatian dominance, or exclusive use of French), as well as proficiency in the dialect (speaking the dialect with ease, with difficulty, just a few words, or not at all). Generational differences were found, with the younger generation speaking the dialect less well, and with less frequency than their parents' generation. Denis & Veltman also found that the dialect is used less in cities than in villages, less among professionals than among workers or farmers, and less among women than among men. These are not new results, but the large sample of respondents and the broad geographical scope of their study gives added strength to their results. Their study includes several maps showing a geographical distribution of Alsatian use. Clearly, dialect use in general is much lower in the Haut-Rhin than in the Bas-Rhin. In fact, when considering Alsatian use with friends, all of the southern half of Alsace showed very low use. And in Southern Alsace, even in areas around Sélestat, Altkirch, and Guebwiller none of which are large cities the decline of the dialect has been very abrupt, over the last two generations. They conclude that the regression of the dialect is a regional phenomenon as much as an urban one (Denis & Veltman, 1989: 71). Their study also investigated language use in the workplace, as reported by the students, and they found no great difference between language use in the workplace and in the family. Some other findings are interesting: students who learned French exclusively at home follow a longer course of study one which leads to university studies m than do students who learned Alsatian or a combination of Alsatian and French. They also

< previous page

page_56

next page >

< previous page

page_57

next page > Page 57

found that German is still widely studied, but that English is gaining, and that 85% of the students study both languages. Conclusion While the studies reviewed above are difficult to compare because of diverse methodologies and aims they point to some trends in the Alsatian linguistic situation. The factors associated with language use/choice in Alsace which were identified in the above-mentioned research were age, geographical location, gender, educational background/profession, and domain. While Coles's study in Munster showed a slightly different pattern, dominance in Alsatian is associated with older speakers, whereas dominance in French is characteristic of the young. In the case of Munster, the fact that 11-12-yearolds used the dialect with their parents more than did the 13-14 and 15-16-year-olds may be due to the conservatism, and the relative isolation of the Valley of the Lauch, where Munster is situated. Rural or urban residence is a decisive factor in the use of the dialect (Ladin (1982) and Ladin & Rosenfeld (1979) identify it as the most decisive one). All the preceding studies show that, in the cities, the percentage of use of French always rose dramatically. The reasons, according to Ladin, reflect a combination of social, political, and economic processes. Urbanization and industrialization, which directly depend on Paris, foster the use of French. Cities attract more of the monolingual French speakers, of the educated, and of the upper and middle classes, all of whom use French. Gender is another element which determines dialect use. In all communicative situations mentioned in his questionnaire, Ladin (1982: 188) found that girls used the dialect less than did the boys. Ladin explains that French is the language of prestige, of fashions, of elegant living, and refinement, and women may be more sensitive to these characteristics. Most women work in the area of services, which is dominated by French (Ladin, 1982: 188). French, long a mark of good breeding, refinement, and education, is still used more in middle and upper classes. The dialect is more likely to be spoken among workers or agriculture-related professions. In the latter case, Alsatian use may be due to the fact that farmers often work within

< previous page

page_57

next page >

< previous page

page_58

next page > Page 58

the territorial limits of the villages. They do not usually come into contact with outsiders, or with a wide range of persons. Their social contacts are likely to be predominantly with people of the village or with other farmers, i.e. other dialect speakers. The causes of shift are varied and complex: many parents no longer teach their children the dialect. Clearly, the history of Alsace and the nature of the language contact situation have profoundly affected norms of linguistic behavior and the functions of the dialect. Hessini sees the use of Alsatian versus French as a marker of public/private and formal/informal domains. Some of the conversations recorded by Hessini (1981) show an insider/outsider dichotomy similar to the one described by J. Gumperz in his study of a bilingual Slovenian and German village community (Gumperz, 1978: 83-103). Clearly, both for some monolingual French speakers and for some Alsatian speakers, the dialect is a powerful ethnic marker. Thus, some monolingual French speakers equate speaking the dialect with a political choice showing a lack of allegiance to France. The dialect also functions as a marker of solidarity versus distance, and is a way of expressing one's regional rather than national allegiance (compare Blom and Gumperz, 1972). Some interesting points about the psychological factors governing language choice/use are brought out by Hessini. In a language-shift situation like the one in Alsace, notions of group boundaries and ethnic identity, as well as standards of evaluation, vary with context. This is clear from one of Hessini's respondents. One woman uses Alsatian at home, and uses Alsatian first in other situations, but switches to French if her interlocutor does not speak the dialect. On the one hand, she tells monolingual French speakers that it is 'a shame that they don't know Alsatian' since she the respondent has made every effort to learn French. On the other hand, this same person also confesses that if a German tourist addresses her on the street, she immediately speaks French because they [the Germans] need not assume that we are Germans because we speak Alsatian. At the limit if a German is really polite and doesn't address me in an arrogant condescending way, then I give him the information in Alsatian but never in standard German. And if one of them looks arrogant then I act as if I didn't understand him. They'd better know that we are in France here. (Hessini, 1981: 151) The preceding discussion has important implications for the future of the Alsatian dialect: on the one hand, the shift to French is undeniable. On the other hand, some observers of the Alsatian situation are hoping that

< previous page

page_58

next page >

< previous page

page_59

next page > Page 59

the more benign attitude of the French government towards minority languages and language maintenance, as well as the consciousness-raising activities of the language maintenance groups, may yet alter the Alsatian sense of identity. 2 Notes 1. Beer (1980, 93-110) obtained interesting answers to a questionnaire about the social characteristics and the motivation of ethnic activists on which he worked while at the University of Strasbourg. It would appear that a disproportionate number of activists are intellectuals. In the sample, fully 37% of the activists were professors and teachers, while they only comprise 3.8% of the population. Contact with other activists was mentioned most often as the genesis of their involvement with language activism. Interestingly, the least-cited reason is 'unpleasant experiences at school.' Other experiences such as reading in history, literature in/about the dialect, family upbringing, and encouragement of professors are all positive. 2. Comments to Marguerite Hessini by a university student in Strasbourg seem to reflect the new pride and views of many supporters of the Alsatian language, and are worth quoting here. He strives to speak Alsatian ... here at home with S [his girlfriend], with my friends, everywhere people understand it. Even at the university with X [a professor], for example, I always use Alsatian. With the other professors, it doesn't work, even if they know Alsatian, they answer only in French. To speak Alsatian with a professor is simply something which hasn't been done until now ... It has been considered proper always to use exclusively French at school ... To be educated is to speak the national language and not some barbarian dialect, which moreover is crude. (Hessini, 1981: 155-6) Asked how he sees the relationship between Alsatian and (standard) German the same student responds: First, I never say Alsatian, but Alsatian German [Elsaserditsch] in the same way as we say Swiss-German ... Alsatian is a German dialect and has little to do with French ... This is not a political position, simply a linguistic fact ... If we studied our Alsatian history, which of course does not happen with those French, we would know that culturally speaking we belong to Germany. But of course one can't say such a thing. We are supposed to be Celts, they tell us. Our history begins only in the seventeenth century when the French annexed us without asking for our opinion. Apparently we didn't exist before. The Middle Ages, when Alsace was German and culturally in the spotlight in Europe don't count. (Hessini, 1981: 156-7) This particular student advocates the teaching of German rather than Alsatian, and claims that 'the political situation nowadays is different from the one after World War II. To speak German no longer necessarily means

< previous page

page_59

next page >

< previous page

page_60

next page > Page 60

that one is a Nazi, on the contrary' (Hessini, 1981: 159). This interview shows that, for some young Alsatians, psychological barriers which used to prevent them from acknowledging their Germanness are gone. This young man does not remember the Nazi period, and has no reservations about Alsatian ties to the German world.

< previous page

page_60

next page >

< previous page

page_61

next page > Page 61

3 Language Choice and Code Switching in Alsace Since French, Alsatian and German and several varieties of these languages coexist in Alsace, it follows that bi/multilingual Alsatians must make linguistic choices when they communicate. Furthermore, it is a well-accepted notion among sociolinguists that language choice is not a random phenomenon, but that it displays certain patterns which are known by the speakers of the community. Bilingual Alsatians, in order to function properly in Alsatian society, must not only have the necessary linguistic knowledge (syntax, phonology, lexicon) of the codes used but, at the discourse level, they must possess and employ skills which affect communicative effectiveness. Gumperz (1982a: 48) has suggested that code-switching the alternation of two languages within discourse may be such a skill. Indeed, Breitborde (1983a: 5) has called code-switching the 'principal behavior through which bilingualism is expressed'. More specifically, code-switching is a communicative resource that builds on the speakers' perception of two (or more) contrasting languages. The question is: why do bilinguals, who speak both Alsatian and French, sometimes use one language, and sometimes the other, when conversing with each other? What motivates a particular choice? And what are the functions of these choices? While the likelihood of language choices might be predicted by 'decision trees' (compare Hessini, 1981: 94), it is generally agreed that it is impossible to predict every instance of language choice or switch made by a bilingual. Rather, these choices can best be interpreted after they have occurred. Consequently, Chapter 3 considers some of the necessary knowledge for understanding language choice in Alsace: (1) generalities about language choice and code-switching; (2) a brief summary of the historical events which have led to the presentday linguistic situation; and (3) a description of attitudes towards and use of language varieties in Alsace. Chapter 4 will provide examples of code-switching occuring in recorded natural conversation data, in an attempt to discover and explain some of the mechanisms of language choice in Alsace.

< previous page

page_61

next page >

< previous page

page_62

next page > Page 62

Factors in Language Choice The sociolinguistic aspects of language choice have been investigated by sociologists, psychologists, and anthropologists, using differing approaches. Fishman (1972) stresses language choice as a result of conventions which arise in society when the use of one particular language becomes associated with and expected in certain types of situations or spheres of activities which he calls domains. Domains are theoretical constructs which include factors such as location, topic, and participant. In Hispanic communities in the Southwestern United States, or in the Puerto Rican community in New York, for instance, schools are usually associated with English, while Spanish may be the home language. Similarly, in Alsace, French is the language of education and of administration, while Alsatian is more likely to be used in the home, as was shown in studies by Tabouret-Keller, Hessini, Ladin and Denis & Veltman (see Chapter 2). Language choice may be determined by topic, since the bi/multilingual speaker may have learned about a specific topic through the medium of one language, and may therefore feel most comfortable discussing the topic in that language. Or one of the languages may lack specialized terminology for that topic. Participants also affect language choice. Speakers' language choice is constrained by their respective language proficiency or preference. Another determining factor is the degree of intimacy between interlocutors. Grosjean points out that bilingual friends and relatives often have an 'agreedupon' language of interaction when the situation or topic does not impose a specific language (Grosjean, 1982: 136). When conversing with strangers, one must learn to assess their language competence through social interaction. My own respondents often explained that once their interlocutor had spoken, they could decide on whether to continue the conversation in French or in Alsatian, depending on such factors as age, sex, apparent socio-economic status, and accent or lack of accent in French. Additional factors in the investigation of language choice may include socialpsychological dimensions such as intimate or informal versus formal, and intra-versus outer-group communication. Fishman's study of domains of language use can be described as a 'macro' approach, which is opposed to the more person-centered approach of social psychology. Giles' accommodation theory claims that speakers will deliberately change their speech in order to accomodate to their listener. As a courtesy to the interlocutor, speakers will probably choose the language in which they know their hearer(s) to be most fluent. One of my respondents, a 60-year-old man, reported always speaking Alsatian to elderly relatives, because, even though the latter speak French, he knows that they feel most

< previous page

page_62

next page >

< previous page

page_63

next page > Page 63

comfortable in Alsatian. At times, however, a person will deliberately make his or her speech maximally different from that of his or her interlocutor, to increase distance. Linguistic anthropologists identify the values of a group as they are revealed by linguistic behavior. They are interested in the speaker's perception of him or herself as a member of a certain community, and his or her language choice is interpreted as the person's attempt to adopt the values of one speech community or another. Le Page & Tabouret-Keller support this view: they consider language behavior as 'a series of acts of identity in which people reveal both their personal identity and their search for social roles,' by creating linguistic patterns 'so as to resemble those of the group or groups with which from time to time they wish to be identified' (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985:14 and 18). Gumperz adopts a dichotomous view of social identity which is expressed through the use of the 'we code' or the 'they code.' The former reflects belonging to a group, or solidarity with a group. The latter may be considered to be the language of outsiders. Thus, language choice by ethnic minority members may serve as an identity marker, and as a way of maintaining separation from other societal groups. While macrolevel studies are very useful in describing linguistic usage and in identifying societal norms, these studies fail to account for individual language choice in specific contexts, and also for subtle language variation and use. On the one hand, then, at the macrolevel, some domains seem to be associated with a particular code. On the other hand, at the microlevel, rather than primarily responding to the extra-linguistic situation, the speakers use 'their own understanding of situational norms to communicate metaphoric information about how they intend their words to be understood' (Gumperz, 1982a: 61). The aim of this chapter is to build a bridge between abstract notions of social structure and social norms, on the one hand, and the details of the interaction on the other. Some of the crucial questions are: how do societal norms affect speakers' perceptions of each language's connotations? And how do speakers incorporate these connotations in interaction strategies which allow others to interpret speakers' communicative intent? According to Gal (1983), the processes of connecting the 'macro' social structure with the 'micro' details of interaction include intentionality, interpretation, symbolization and negotiation. Gal also points out that recent research views language behavior not as a matter of obeying societal norms but rather of actively constructing situations in conversation and

< previous page

page_63

next page >

< previous page

page_64

next page > Page 64

interpreting other communicative intents on the basis of cultural knowledge which is itself subject to change in response to historical processes. (Gal, 1983: 70) Therefore, more attention needs to be focused on the processes that enable individual speakers to create and maintain their social relationships in interaction, while also constrained by social norms in the set of role relationships open to them. It should be clear from the foregoing paragraphs that language choice is very complex, and that various factors are usually at work. Code-switching presents a unique opportunity to analyze these factors. Code-Switching Code-switching the alternation of two languages within discourse is a very important and salient aspect of bilingualism. It raises a large number of linguistic, psychological and social issues. These have been addressed from a variety of theoretical and methodological approaches. Some researchers, using natural speech samples or grammaticality judgments, have provided answers concerning the linguistic parameters of the phenomenon: Timm (1975), Poplack (1981, 1982), and Pfaff (1982) have defined true code-switching as opposed to borrowing, and they have established the syntactic constraints on code-switching. Other researchers have been more concerned with exploring the sociolinguistic parameters of code-switching, and the conditions under which each language is selected. Thanks especially to the seminal work of Blom, Gumperz, and Fishman, the crucial question of why two codes continue to exist side by side in a community, where speakers are competent in both, has been explored. There is empirical as well as intuitive validity to the difference Blom & Gumperz (1972) make between situational and metaphorical code-switching. Situational switching occurs when a situation is being redefined by new participants or a different setting, while metaphorical switching may reflect a new topic, or new emphasis in the conversation. Blom & Gumperz propose that networks, i.e. personal associations, are essential in explaining language choice and code-switching. Breitborde (1983b: 161) argues that the microlinguistic approach of Blom & Gumperz, and the macrolinguistic approach of Fishman, are not mutually exclusive, and that in order to understand code-switching, one must consider 'both regularities and features of the interactions in which

< previous page

page_64

next page >

< previous page

page_65

next page > Page 65

speaking occurs (microlevel) and higher order regularities of the social system (macrolevel)' (Breitborde, 1983: 161). Indeed, the microlevel interaction becomes meaningful to participants only by reference to a macrolevel social system. My analysis is based on the theoretical premise that we cannot begin to understand the meaning and significance of language choice and code-switching in Alsace without a knowlege of present-day societal norms of linguistic usage and of the historical forces which have shaped and are still shaping the Alsatian sense of identity. The relationship between macrolevel and microlevel is also perceived as an important issue in Heller (1988) and McClure & McClure (1988). They see code-switching as an 'important part of social mechanisms of negotiation and definition of social roles, networks and boundaries' available to speakers (Heller, 1988: 1). At the same time, they point out that communication can be effective and violations interpreted only when conventions are shared by interlocutors. Carol Myers Scotton (1988) views the interplay of societal factors and more individual, creative and transactional factors as both a tool used by speakers to accomplish certain goals, and as an index for the listener to interpret his or her interlocutor's intentions. In a 1988 study based primarily on East African data, she expands on the markedness model which she had proposed in earlier work (Scotton, 1983). In her new model, she proposes that, besides relying on Grice's cooperative principle, maxims, and conversational implicatures, speakers also use a 'negotiation principle' based on an awareness of 'rights and obligations' holding between participants in a particular conversational exchange. More specifically, each linguistic code in a given hi/multilingual community will be associated to 'the unmarked realization of an expected set of rights and obligations' and will be recognized and interpreted as such. Speakers in a particular linguistic community know that in a given conventionalized exchange, a certain code is expected (and therefore unmarked), while other linguistic code choices are marked and violate or alter a set of rights and obligations. Thus, a speaker's flouting or observing of markedness conventions will be interpreted by listeners, and will have interpersonal consequences. Scotton sees three main types of linguistic choices: (1) unmarked choices in conventionalized exchanges uphold the status quo; (2) marked choices deviate from, or alter, the expected balance and rules of conversation; and (3) choices in non-conventionalized exchanges nominate a set of rights and obligations to be the unmarked pro temp basis for the present exchange (Scotton, 1988: 156). Scotton's theory characterizes code-switching as less dependent on the situation than it is on negotiation of position, given

< previous page

page_65

next page >

< previous page

page_66

next page > Page 66

the situation. Motivation to achieve an intended goal and awareness of social consequences and expectations thus explain code-switching. Scotton tested the psychological reality of her model by studying reactions to code-switching of local community members to switching in situations familiar to them (Scotton & Ury, 1977; Scotton, 1982). Interestingly, 'subjects regularly attributed to speakers socio-psychological motivations with interpersonal consequences, based on their language use' (Scotton, 1988: 157). Such interpretations lend some support to my own analysis of code-switching in Chapter 4, since I rely on insights and intuitions afforded by membership to the Alsatian and French linguistic communities in Alsace. Before scrutinizing the conversations, it will be useful to recall briefly some of the factors that have led to the presentday linguistic situation, and their role in shaping language attitudes and norms towards the varieties spoken in Alsace. Attitudes toward language varieties reflect attitudes towards the users of these varieties. Attitudes are related to motivation for language choice, and can have profound effects on language usage. Indeed, Le Page & Tabouret-Keller claim that motivation to identify with groups a component of attitude is 'by far the most important of the constraints for linguistic behavior' (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985: 184). Historical genesis of present-day linguistic situation in Alsace It has been said that the Nazi occupation of Alsace during World War II did more for the cause of the French language than two centuries of French government policies before that. The psychological damage and the ensuing negative views of German and of the dialect cannot be overestimated. After the trauma of the Nazi occupation, and after Alsace had once again become French, the use of the dialect was viewed by monolingual French speakers (and perhaps a few Alsatians too) as a political choice showing a lack of allegiance to France. Alsatians were made to feel guilty for continuing to speak the dialect, and some Alsatians, in order to prove themselves as true Frenchmen, reacted by displaying intense chauvinism and asserting their allegiance to France. This often meant refusing to speak Alsatian. To this day, Alsatians can still be very sensitive to the language issue, and to questions about it, as noted in Chapter 1, and as evidenced by the continuous flow of letters to the editor of the newspaper l'Alsace, in which readers take position for or against the use of the dialect.

< previous page

page_66

next page >

< previous page

page_67

next page > Page 67

Field researchers on the linguistic situation in Alsace must be very careful in explaining their goals when gathering information, because the first reaction may be one of suspicion about ulterior motives. Even non-dialect speakers can be sensitive to questions, as reported by Vogler (1984), who, while doing research in the Munster area, was told by an irritated monolingual French speaker: 'Vos questions, c'est comme à la police!' Ladin (1982), an Austrian, was repeatedly told that only a 'neutral' foreigner like himself but no French or German researcher could have carried out his project. Foreigners are viewed as more detached, and possibly more objective. Ladin does express surprise at the fact that no Alsatian had attempted to carry out the kind of research he did. In my own case, I sometimes sensed some reluctance as I looked for respondents. Yet, I had the impression that being of Alsatian background, but living in the United States was a distinct advantage, i.e. I shared a common Alsatian background but I also was more 'removed' from the situation in Alsace. After Alsace became French again in 1945, French authorities launched a major campaign to promote French. This was done through educational policies, regulation of the press, and propaganda. Parents of school children were discouraged by school officials from speaking the Alsatian dialect with their children, on the grounds that the dialect was a serious handicap for the learning of French, for the pursuit of advanced studies, and ultimately for career opportunities. Alsatian was forbidden on the playground. Many dialectophone students were ridiculed or punished, and a whole generation grew up feeling ashamed of the dialect. The use of German was strictly regulated in the press, and a poster campaign proclaimed 'C'est chic de parler français!'' The overwhelming prestige enjoyed by French explains partially the Alsatian's passivity in accepting the government's language policies. 1 As was pointed out in Chapter 1, French has long been a language of prestige in Alsace, and a sign of refinement and education. It has also long been the language of the upper classes. Recent trends may be favorable to a resurgence of the dialect. Some language maintenance groups have endeavored to educate the public on the advantages of bilingualism (although they refer to French/High German bilingualism) and encourage Alsatians to use their dialect and to teach it to their children. Very recently, the French government has officially recognized minority languages, and now allows the Alsatian dialect and culture to be taught in schools. In my visits to secondary schools, however, I learned that the langue et culture régionales programs usually stress culture, rather than dialect teaching. The impact if any of these governmental

< previous page

page_67

next page >

< previous page

page_68

next page > Page 68

changes on the linguistic situation, and on attitudes towards the dialect, remains to be determined. The younger generation, unlike their parents and grandparents, does not remember World War II, and does not share the negative political connotations associated with the use of the dialect. Yet, this generation often does not speak the dialect, simply because their parents did not teach them a language which they considered to be a handicap. The preceding section is suggestive of some of the exceedingly complex motivations to choose French or Alsatian. Some important functions of the two languages can be inferred: Alsatian is used as an ethnic marker; as a marker of solidarity or 'in-groupness' versus distance; or as a way to express one's regional rather than national allegiance. French, on the other hand, is often a social class marker, a mark of refinement and education, and might be used to show one's first allegiance to the nation, as opposed to the region. Code-switching can be a way for an individual to show that he or she belongs to two communities. I code-switch with some Alsatians when I return to Alsace, in an attempt to 'fit in' in situations of which I am no longer regularly a part. Attitudes Towards Alsatian and French It is also useful for this analysis to review some of the findings about attitudes towards languages in Alsace. As Tabouret-Keller (1985) and Vogler (1984) point out, the ways in which the dialect is referred to are very telling. Some refer to a 'Germanic dialect,' a less precise term than 'a German dialect' or 'a dialect of German.' Alsatian is described as 'd Sproch vum Elsass,' and some speakers do not feel that it is a patois a pejorative term which suggests a local dialect since it is widespread in Alsace. Many educators, however, doubt that Alsatian can be considered as a full-fledged language, since it is not legally considered as such, and since it is not standardized. Hence the most common designation of Alsatian as le dialecte. For some people the dissymmetry between the evaluation of Alsatian as opposed to French or German (a 'mere' dialect, as opposed to two national languages) can be resolved by considering Alsatian as 'an oral form of standard German.' This way, Alsatian is not only an 'ethnic' language, but also a 'state' language. However, according to this view, Alsatian is 'un Allemand sans Allemagne' (a German language without Germany). This view narrows the gap between standard German and Alsatian, in

< previous page

page_68

next page >

< previous page

page_69

next page > Page 69

order to give the dialect more prestige. Yet, the disconnection of Alsatian from literary German was at its highest each time that Alsace was part of Germany (Vogler, 1984: 191). Not only are the relative views of prestige different, but there are other ways in which the view of languages differs. Vogler observes that his respondents have a binary view of Alsace and its various parts, and that only the perception of the boundary (boundaries) change(s). For instance, his respondants in the Munster Valley may view Munster as belonging to the 'we' domain, as opposed to Colmar, a large neigboring city, which is classified as the 'they' domain. But Munster can also become the 'they' domain, as opposed to the small adjoining or more distant villages which would then be considered as the 'we' domain. In this latter case, Munster may stand for francophonie, as opposed to the villages which are the domain of the dialect. Shifting boundaries reflecting shifting identity also characterize persons: teachers can place themselves in the 'they' domain when they deal with rural speakers. But they can also represent rural speakers when facing the administration of the school (Vogler, 1984: 185). The binary view described by Vogler, i.e. the contrast of internal/external, of the self or of the smaller group versus society at large, and of the local versus the regional or the national, is consistent with the we/they dichotomy proposed by Gumperz (1982: 66). Attitudes towards the dialect are very complex. On the one hand, the dialect is appreciated and valued: one respondent recounted how disgusted he was with a relative who had spent a few months in Paris, and who had returned to Alsace pretending not to be able to speak Alsatian. Her attitude was considered snobbish and ridiculous. And an Alsatian expatriate was cheered at a troisième age club when she made a presentation in Alsatian 'even though as the president of the club noted she had been abroad for twenty years.' The fact that she still remembered how to speak was considered worthy of praise. On the other hand, there is also derision for some of the foreigners who have made an effort to learn the dialect. The attitude seems to be that this person was foolish to expand this sort of effort on a 'mere' dialect (Vogler, 1984). While the bilingual character of Alsace is valued by those who consider the region as a link between France and Germany, the majority of Vogler's respondents view it rather as a defect. This may be due to the fact that Alsatians are often accused of speaking neither Alsatian nor French well. This criticism is found even in Alsatian language promotion groups. They often chide Alsatians for their poor mastery of the dialect. But Alsatians are also criticized for their 'bad' French. Philipps (1982: 199) writes: 'Certes, ils

< previous page

page_69

next page >

< previous page

page_70

next page > Page 70

sont souvent de piètres francophones'. Monolingual French speakers often complain that when in Alsace, they don't feel that they are in France. One of the salient 'flaws' of Alsatian French is an 'accent.' Pronunciation and prosody are judged very negatively when they differ from the norm or standard, i.e. the pronunciation of an educated Parisian (Philipp, 1985). In recent years, some Alsatians interested in the defense and promotion of the dialect are now declaring that they do not want to lose their Alsatian accent, because they are proud to be Alsatian. An Alsatian accent may, therefore, have covert prestige. The dialect is considered useful among health professionals, lawyers and judges. Beatrice Sommer, a nurse, mentions that a doctor and patient need to establish a trusting relationship, and that this can be done through the use of the dialect, especially with elderly patients. She adds that the use of the dialect may increase the patient's cooperation with the medical team, and thus increase the effectiveness of medical care (Sommer, 1982: 69). Pierre Kretz (1982), a Strasbourg lawyer, mentions that Francophone judges occasionally propose to elderly litigants to speak the dialect and to have an Alsatian interpreter, only to get a haughty refusal. In this case, the judge has hurt the dialect speaker's feelings by underestimating his ability to speak French. However, in Kretz' experience, when he gives his Alsatian clients the option to speak the dialect, a feeling of trust develops between lawyer and client. 'Some then go on to speak the dialect, while others speak French, but with the satisfaction that his listener speaks the dialect' (Kretz, 1982: 66). In spite of all the foregoing, occasionally, some of Vogler's respondents did not think that language choice reflected norms or attitudes, but rather that it was random: 'tu parles automatiquement' in the language used by the interlocutor (Vogler, 1984: 185). Notes 1. This does not mean that there was no opposition to Frenchification, or defenders of Alsatian and High German in Alsace. In earlier periods, the Protestant and Catholic Church, some political parties, and some intellectuals argued strongly in favor of protecting High German and Alsatian. See two very interesting articles by Frédéric Hartweg: 'Les églises et le français en Alsace de 1850 à 1918' (1985); and 'L'allemand en Alsace de 1918 à 1940' (1988).

< previous page

page_70

next page >

< previous page

page_71

next page > Page 71

4 Analysis of Conversations Although sociolinguistic research must be based on a variety of approaches, such as correlational studies of variables, or ethnographic description of cultural norms, Stubbs has convincingly argued that, ultimately, 'sociolinguistic study will have to be based, at least partly, on how people actually talk to each other in everyday settings ...,' and how people introduce or change topics, how they assert, question, deny, argue, protest, apologize, etc. (Stubbs, 1983: 7). Gumperz specifically thinks of code-switching strategies when he also pleads for 'detailed investigations of ... actual conversational exchanges, to show that they exhibit some form of linguistic patterning' (Gumperz, 1982a: 72). While the data presented in the present chapter is limited, it sheds some light on language choice and code-switching in Alsace, as recorded in samples of natural conversations. Three specific types of 'communicative events,' which are recognized in Alsace, are presented here: 'service encounters,' 1 involving clients and clerks; an apology; and a telephone conversation. These events were selected for description and analysis for several reasons: they have readily identifiable boundaries, i.e. beginnings and endings; and they are types of events which occur in similar form, and with some frequency: in fact, they are conventionalized in the sense that, in Scotton's (1988: 152) words, speakers 'have a sense of script'. This sense of script predicts certain phonological and syntactic patterns, certain lexical items, and also language choice. Bearing in mind the descriptive and explicative models mentioned in Chapter 3, more particularly the ethnographic approach, with its goal-of elucidating the native point of view, and the Gumperz transactional analysis of specific speech events, the objectives of this section are: (1) to determine whether code-switching in the following conversations serves to convey, in Gumperz' (1982a) words, 'semantically significant information'; (2) to examine the interaction of societal 'macro' norms with the more 'micro' details of the ongoing conversation, i.e. to show how knowledge of linguistic norms and expectations concerning appropriate speech behavior are related to specific utterances and language choice or code-switching;

< previous page

page_71

next page >

< previous page

page_72

next page > Page 72

and (3) to identify some of the discourse functions of code-switching. My conversational data are based primarily on tape recordings and some observational notes of natural, i.e. spontaneous conversations, gathered during the summers of 1987 and 1988. The conversations are fluent, with no hesitation, and no evidence of the speaker making conscious choices. Previous analyses of code-switching in service encounters can be found in Hessini's 1981 dissertation 'Language use in culture spaces: Alsatian, a case study' (pp. 118-27). Her transcripts of conversations shed light on norms of behavior in Alsace and they illustrate the connection between the micro and macro levels of interaction. Some of her findings are discussed below as a guide in interpreting my own data: (1) Hessini (1981: 120) mentions that 'in large department stores where customer and personnel are unknown to each other, French often prevails'. Ladin found that most of his respondents (high-school-age students in the Strasbourg area) reported that in a big department store, they address the sales personnel in French first, or only in French. My own experience in Alsace corroborates that Alsatians of all ages tend to use French first to address sales persons, since some people would not be bilingual. Only older people, who never mastered French would be expected to speak Alsatian. Flaunting the rules by using a marked choice (i.e. using Alsatian when French is expected) can produce disapproval, irritation, or outright negativeness on the part of interlocutors. (2) Reluctance of a sales person to use Alsatian with an unknown customer could stem from a variety of reasons. Clerks know that, if other customers are present, they may be critical of Alsatian used in situations where French is expected (Hessini, 1981: 120). Indeed, for some people, the use of Alsatian takes on political overtones of allegiance to the region rather than to the notion. Currently, some dialect promotion groups in Alsace are challenging the primacy of French and they advocate greater use of Alsatian in situations in which it has not been used in recent years. One recommended tactic is for Alsatians to demand that representatives of the French government, such as policemen and government workers address an Alsatian in his own dialect if the latter so desires (Land un Sproch, 1986, Nb. 1-2). Thus, insisting on using the dialect in a situation which calls for French could be construed as a form of political and language activism, i.e. a deliberate challenge. In view of the long history of associating the use of the dialect with lack of patriotism and questionable allegiance to France, it is not impossible that such connotations are present in the clients' minds. (3) It may also be that, since the dialect is sometimes associated with lack of education and 'peasantness,' its use is perceived as inappropriate

< previous page

page_72

next page >

< previous page

page_73

next page > Page 73

and incompatible with the atmosphere of presumed sophistication in a city department store. (4) Use of Alsatian by a client with a sales person may be perceived as presumptuous, since Alsatian for some people is reserved for family, friends and colleagues, much as the tu/du forms would be. Probably for this reason, speaking Alsatian with a fellow worker, even in an environment where French is the norm, is perceived as less of a breach, since it seems like an intimate aside. (5) A sales person could interpret being addressed in Alsatian as meaning that he or she is perceived as belonging to the generation which never had much French schooling i.e. that he or she is perceived as old, or older than he or she is. The sales person may feel offended. We would have a phenomenon similar to but reversed from the one in Sweden, mentioned by Christina Bratt Paulston (1984), where older speakers reported feeling young when they were addressed with the familiar du. (6) Some of Hessini's (1981) transcripts of interaction in a small neighborhood store show that the use of the dialect can mark solidarity with a client who is obviously a regular while it marks distance with a first-time client. Most probably, language choice results from many factors, and no single reason can be found for code-switching. Some are related to the macro-situation in Alsace, such as the association of the dialect with peasantness or with an unpatriotic attitude. Others reflect the multi-functionality of discourse strategies at the micro level. But what is certain is that language choice and code-switching are interpreted by interlocutors. Code-switching which is marked, i.e. where the 'wrong' code is used is often clearly metaphorical in the sense that besides the referential meaning of what is said, something else is communicated. It is as if speakers use different sets of norms; and while the strictly referential meaning of what is said is perfectly well understood, the fact that each person insists on using his or her own set of rules produces friction, and conveys feelings such as annoyance and disapproval. The detailed scrutiny of transcripts of conversations shows that there is a constant process of adjustment and counter adjustment to each speaker's expectations of each other. Parkin, in his description of code-switching in Nairobi notes that interlocutors recognize certain postulates of the relationship ... yet make concessions, or challenges and counter challenges to each other on the basis of qualities and skills which fall through the net of the necessarily

< previous page

page_73

next page >

< previous page

page_74

next page > Page 74

loose definition of the role-relationship as made by the over-arching values or stereotypes. (Parkin, 1974: 191). Tabouret-Keller (1983) makes a similar point when she proposes that language choice may conform more to the hierarchy of social identities, from which one chooses a certain facet or a certain feature, which one wants to stress in a certain interaction this act of identity being expressed by language use. The following conversations were recorded in Mulhouse in the summers of 1987 and 1988. They are 'service encounters,' in which a 'posted server' and a customer interact. In my transcripts, the intonation contours were marked superficially, and I use Alsatian writing, such as it might be written in the Mulhouse area (transcription conventions are given at the end of the chapter). While graphization is not set for Alsatian dialects, the orthography used here was inspired by but is not exactly the same as m that used by Alfred Willenbucher, a playwright and a columnist for the newspaper L'Alsace. The portions in italics correspond to Alsatian, both in my transcription and in the translations into English. Conversation 1 In a business which makes photocopies and other reproductions. The office is small and crowded with five customers; three university students and two older customers. They are waiting for their turn, and everyone seems to be anxious to be helped and leave. The owner does the copying behind the counter. Both the client and the owner are men in their fifties. The owner has not quite finished with the previous customer's order when the client, anticipating his turn, speaks up. Client: Macha mir hundert fufztig. Owner:Oui, d'accord. Client: (after a moment of reflection) Nei reach mir hundert fimfa sevetzig. Owner:Bon. Translation of conversation 1. Client: Make me a hundred and fifty (copies). Owner: All right. Client: No, make me a hundred and seventy five. Owner: Fine.

< previous page

page_74

next page >

< previous page

page_75

next page > Page 75

Conversation 2 At the cashier's of a large department store in Mulhouse; the cashier is behind the counter; a client has just set the items which she has selected on the counter. The cashier, who is very business-like and barely looks at the customers, has taken them, and is adding up the total purchase. Other clients are waiting their turn. Cashier:Madame (adds up the items), soixante et un francs, Madame. (Client sets down a two-hundred-francs bill.) Cashier:(handing her change) soixante-dix, quatre-vingts, quatrevingt-dix, cent. Ah, attendez, je vous ai roulée! Client: (looking at the change) Jo ammel, ich hat mich nit amol garta! Cashier:Oui, vous m'avez donné deux cent francs et je les ai laissés sur la caisse (hands the client another hundredfrancs change) Client: (looking at other client waiting next to her) Oui, ça arive qu'on se trompe. Chacun doit faire attention. (to the cashier) Merci Madame d'avoir remarqué Cashier:Mais de rien Madame, si on s'en rend compte. Translation of conversation 2. Cashier:Madam, (adds the items), sixty-one francs, Madam. (Client sets down a two-hundred-francs bill.) Cashier:(handing her change) Seventy, eighty, ninety, one hundred. Oh, wait, I cheated you! Client: (looking at the change) Of course, I wouldn't even have noticed! Cashier:Yes, you gave me two hundred francs and I left them on the cash register (hands the client another hundred francs bill) Client: (looking at other client waiting next to her) Yes, making a mistake does happen. Each person must be careful. (to the cashier) Thank you for noticing, Madam Cashier:You are welcome Madam, if one becomes aware of it. Conversations 1 and 2 show some similarities with some of the conversations quoted from Hessini, in that customers use at least some Alsatian, but the service-renders do not, even though they obviously understand what is said. Conversation 2 takes place in one of the largest department stores in Mulhouse. The photo duplication store is a tiny office, set up in what is

< previous page

page_75

next page >

< previous page

page_76

next page > Page 76

really a former apartment. So why do the 'servers' in both situations not use Alsatian? Most of the customers in the photocopy store are probably university students, teachers, professionals and functionaries. The client in the conversation carries a briefcase, and appears to be an office employee. It could be that, in view of the fact that mainly intellectuals or office workers all occupations associated with French would need to make copies, the owner prefers not to use Alsatian, because of the still frequent association of the dialect with lack of education. Or, perhaps, he feels that his customer is too much in a hurry to be waited upon, and too pushy: not accommodating to his speech may be a way to teach him proper behavior or to show displeasure. The owner may not want his other possibly monolingual clients to think that, because his client speaks Alsatian he will get preferential treatment. Still another possible concern of the owner is that the waiting clients may interpret the use of Alsatian as the beginning of an exchange of a more private nature, which would slow down the photocopying. The short French answers to the client reflect the fact that the service-render is very busy, and is concentrating on fulfilling the clients' requests as fast as possible. In conversation 2 between the cashier and the customer she has short changed, the customer switches to Alsatian perhaps in trying to emphasize her thankfulness, perhaps to minimize the clerk's error and to mention her own responsibility in not noticing anything. However, the cashier does not switch to Alsatian, perhaps to keep her distance and to stress the businesslike nature of the interaction. The cashier may want to convey to the other customers that she is not doing this as a favor to her Alsatian customer, but that it is just part of her job to rectify any errors she is aware of having made. Perhaps the cashier is also aware that her accent in speaking French and her age label her as a probable dialect speaker, and her feelings may be hurt. But this interpretation is not likely, since both speakers use politeness formulas, and the cashier shows no sign of displeasure for having been addressed in Alsatian. Conversation 3 At a neighborhood butcher shop. The butcher, his wife, and two employees, standing behind the counter and the display cases are busy helping the numerous clients, who are making their purchases for the whole weekend. One of the clerks, A, greets client B and her daughter. A: B:

Mesdames? Het Sa échine?

< previous page

page_76

next page >

< previous page

page_77

next page > Page 77

A:Echine de veau? Ja Will sa's mit ( ) oder ohna ( ) ? B:Ohna A:(showing a portion) Combien, Madame? So ebbis? B:Jaja A:Voilà, noch a Knechala derdssüe? B:Oui s'il vous plaît, oui A:et avec ça? (customer makes a sign that she does not need anything else) Cinquante neuf francs, Madame C:Ich ha, j'ai de la monnaie B:Ich oi, ich will a bitzala abschaffa A:Ja, wenn Sa minz hat B:Ja Ja (gives her the right change) A:'S esch racht B:Au revoir A:Au revoir, merci! Translation of conversation 3 A:Ladies B:Do you have prime ribs? A:Prime ribs of veal? Yes Do you want it with ( ) or without ( ) ? B:Without A:(showing a portion) How much, Madam? Something like this? B:Yes yes A:Here we go, and a little bone with it? B:Yes please A:Anything else? Fifty-nine francs, Madam C:I have, I have change B:I do too I want to get rid of some A:Yes, if you have change B:Yes, yes A:That's right B:Good bye A:Good bye, thank you This conversation takes place in a neighborhood butcher shop which caters to regular customers, such as client B, a 79year-old woman. The server, a woman in her forties, is willing to use the dialect with the customer. The fairly formal greeting 'Mesdames,' rather than a greeting by name which

< previous page

page_77

next page >

< previous page

page_78

next page > Page 78

might be expected for such encounters, may be explained by the fact that B is accompanied by C, a woman in her forties, who is unknown to A. The customer makes her request in Alsatian, since she knows that the clerk speaks Alsatian. The French term 'échine' is used and can be considered here as a semi-technical word. However, this is pronounced in the Alsatian phonology. A accommodates to her client and switches into Alsatian to get more details about the customer's request. The clerk then reverts to French to ask 'How much.' One suspects that most of the French expressions used by the clerk belong to the merchant's jargon or stock phrases: 'How much,' 'Here you go,' 'Something else,' 'Fifty-nine francs,' 'Good bye,' and 'Thank you.' All these expressions are said in French, in what can otherwise be considered as an exchange in Alsatian. Interestingly, Alsatian is used to offer something (a soup bone which the customer will not have to pay for) and also to request that the client give her as much change as possible. Here the use of Alsatian seems to reflect the desire to please an elderly customer who feels more at home in Alsatian than in French. It may also be a way to let the client know that she is a valued regular customer, and that she is recognized as such. The use of Alsatian also brings a sense of cooperation to the transaction: the salesperson gives the customer the cut and amount of meat she has requested and she throws in a free bone and the client also obliges the salesperson by giving her the exact change. Conversation 4 At a small bakery. The shopkeeper is a woman in her early sixties; the customer is in her forties. No other clients are present. Baker: Madame Client: Donnez-moi deux petits pains aux raisins. Vu dana runda Baker: (pointing to some rolls in the window) Die do? Client: Nei, die dunda. Baker: Oui, voilà, six francs, Madame. Client: (pays and is handed the buns) Merci, Madame Baker: Au revoir, Madame Client: Au revoir, Madame Translation of conversation 4 Baker: Madam Client: Give me two small raisin rolls. Those round ones. Baker: (pointing to some rolls in the window) These here?

< previous page

page_78

next page >

< previous page

page_79

next page > Page 79

Client: Baker: Client: Baker: Client:

No, those below OK, here you go, six francs, please Thank you, Madam Good bye, Madam Good bye, Madam

In this interaction, the shopkeeper initiates the conversation and, as expected, uses French to offer her help. Until the client, a first-time customer, speaks up, she has no way of knowing whether the customer is monolingual or an Alsatian speaker. The client answers in French first, and then switches into Alsatian, in order to specify which rolls she wants. The shopkeeper accommodates the client by agreeing to continue in Alsatian. The shopkeeper seems more secure linguistically than the 'servers' in previous conversations. Furthermore, helping a client and determining what he or she wants involves a closer if only temporary working relationship. Perhaps, since in this case the salesperson is attempting to make a sale, she finds that it is 'good business' to make concessions to the client. This is true also of conversation 3 at the butcher shop. In conversation 2 above, the cashier did not have to make a sale. The clients had already selected certain items. In conversation 1, the clients were present to have photocopies made and, besides inquiring about the number of copies desired, there was not much helping involved in the transactions. As in the other data, naming the price of the item bought, returning change, or leave-taking are done in French. Possibly, the switch to French and impending leave-taking also signal a return to a more formal and impersonal level. Perhaps the baker again feels that it is good business to use the language used by the client, and that even though this woman is a first-time client, she could become a regular customer. Perhaps the mixture of Alsatian and French simply is a way of expressing that she considers herself a full member of two linguistic communities. The following short dialogue is not a service encounter, but is an example of an apology. Conversation 5 In a crowded restaurant. A group of four persons is seated at a small table. A new party comes in and sits down at the next table. All

< previous page

page_79

next page >

< previous page

page_80

next page > Page 80

the customers are in their sixties and seventies. While sitting down one woman bumps into the chair of another female client already seated at the next table. A: B: A: B:

Oh, pardon, Madame Il n'y a pas de quoi, Madame Ich ha gmeint ich bin an ehra Stüehl kumma Ich ha nit gschpiirt

Translation of conversation 5 A: Excuse me, Madam B: No harm done, Madam A: I thought I bumped into your chair B: I didn't feel anything This conversation takes place in a crowded restaurant. A and B are ladies in their seventies. When the short exchange begins, both A and B use French. Again this is not unusual, since greetings or apologies are usually borrowed from French even in an otherwise Alsatian conversation. The French word pardon is used almost exclusively rather than the German equivalent Entschuldigen Sie. But because of B's accent in French, and because of her age, A assumes that B is an Alsatian speaker. She switches to Alsatian to apologize again and to mention the 'affront.' B accepts the apology, and reassures her, also in Alsatian. The fact that both the apology and the response to it are expanded upon in Alsatian seems to add additional significance to the strictly referential meaning of the interchange. The use of Alsatian here is used for mitigation, a basic interactive dimension. The dialect reflects solidarity between the two speakers: they both are of retirement age, both are women, and both are of local descent, in a restaurant where most customers are communicating in French. The dialect also may convey a more genuine concern for the other person, and a stronger acceptance of the apology. A uses the extremely polite form 'ehra' instead of 'ejch.' The women's readiness to use the dialect may also reflect the fact that speaking in the dialect is very acceptable for the elderly, and carries no social stigma. In summary, code-switching in the previous examples may signal friendliness or accommodation, as opposed to distance or displeasure; it may stress the business or formal nature of the interaction, rather than a more personal one: and the dialect can also be used to appeal, to apologize, or else to challenge or protest.

< previous page

page_80

next page >

< previous page

page_81

next page > Page 81

Conversation 6 The following conversation is not a service or public encounter like the preceding ones. It is presented here with the aim of not only retrieving sociocultural knowledge, but also of looking at a longer stretch of conversation, and at taking a closer look at the discourse mechanisms of code-switching. Notational conventions are given at the end of the chapter. The interlocutors in this telephone conversation are two women. A is in her mid-forties, and B in her mid-fifties. An invitation to a birthday party was given some days before, but the details of time, place, etc. were to be worked out. A was to call B back in order to find out this information. Both women are related, have known each other for some 25 years and enjoy getting together. Before speaking to B, A has spoken to M, A's husband, and already knows that it is raining at their house, too. Initials stand for names: R, N, and I refer to villages, and the CO refers to the restaurant where the party is to take place; D is B's daughter, and H is B's son-in-law; T and C are friends of the family; L is A's mother. Part A 1. A: 2. B: 3. A: 4. B: 5. A: 6. B: 7. A: 8. 9. B: 10. A:

Salut B Salut A Wie geht's Ça va, ça va Ich sag grad, schint d Sunna bi ejech? Pense-tu, pense-tu! Bi uns ragent s sitter hett s morga J' crois qu' c'est parti, hein C'est parti, ja Ja schad he, kenna net viel macha dussa, he

Translation of Part A 1. A: Hello, B 2. B: Hello A 3. A: How are things? 4. B: All right, all right, 5. A: I was just saying, is the sun shining at your place? 6. B: Are you kidding, are you kidding! 7. A: Here, it's been raining since this morning

< previous page

page_81

next page >

< previous page

page_82

next page > Page 82

8. I think that's the way it's going to be, isn't it? 9. B: That's the way it's going to be, yes 10. A: That's too bad, because one can't do very much outside. While, at the surface level, this opening section of the conversation deals with the weather, it may be regarded as primarily serving a phatic function. A already knows from B's husband that it is raining in N; she is therefore not really asking for information in line 5. Rather, talking about the weather, a neutral subject, is a way for the speakers to 'feel each other out,' to renew contact, to claim fellowship, and to acknowledge that they have a social bond which they have agreed to maintain. Stubbs notes that the primary function of chatting is 'establishing and maintaining social relationships and solidarity: very little new propositional information may be communicated' (Stubbs, 1983: 45-6). Interestingly, A is French-dominant, while B is definitely Alsatian-dominant. Yet in this interchange, A speaks almost exclusively Alsatian, while B uses exclusively French. The cooperative nature of the conversation is apparent from the desire of each speaker to accommodate to the other, by using their dominant language. This reciprocity creates a sense of cooperation, which is also underlined by the fact that A and B call each other by name a mark of affection and courtesy and by lexical repetition and echoing across the speakers, e.g. in lines 8 and 9. But the switching may also be considered as part of the negotiating for which language is going to be used. Part B 11. B: 12. A: 13. B: 14. A: 15. B: 16. A: 17. 18. B: 19. A: 20. B: 21. 22. A: 23. 24. B:

On était hier à R. Ja? Sen Ihr gse? Oui? Weisch, ich ha müessa geh wähla Ah, Du wählsch noch en R? Mais oui, ich be jo net agmalda in N, bis jetz Ah d'accord. Donc, i faut que tu viennes, oui, oui, d'accord Ich be jo noch alawil en R agmalda bis jetza Oui, oui, oui, d'accord, eh, s esch jo nit so wit Non, c'est pas loin. Un mer gehn doch allawil Müess doch weder ufmacha, weder Mais oui, mais oui, mais oui. Geschtert geschtert het's amol net gragent, he Oui

< previous page

page_82

next page >

< previous page

page_83

next page > Page 83

25. A:Awer warm esch's oi net gse 26. B:Hier ça aliait 27. A:Non, hier ça aliait 28. B:Hier ça aliait, oui 29. A:Mais aujourd'hui pas, hein? 30. B:Non, aujourd'hui i fait pas beau 31. A:Enfin, j'sais pas ich glaub morna esch's 32. allawag noch aso. Awer villicht am Mittwuch 33. B:Enfin, s D. het gsait kha do, er will noch ke 34. besser Watter 35. A:Nit? [deleted material] 36. B:S esch doch güet as niema nit kat am Watter 37. macha 38. A:Non, s esch wohr denn s wara doch net alla d'accord, he? Translation of Part B 11. B: Yesterday, we were in R. 12. A: Yes, you went, yes? 13. B: You know, I have to vote in R? 14. A: Oh, you still vote in R? 15. B: Of course, I am not registered in N, up till now 16. A: Ok, so you have to come, yes, 17. yes OK, 18. B: I am still registered in R until now 19. A: Yes, yes, yes, OK, well it isn't that far 20. B: No, it's not far. And we go all the time anyway. 21. I have to open from time to time 22. A: Of course, of course, of course. Yesterday, at 23. yesterday, for once, it didn't rain, did it? 24. B: Yes 25. A: But it wasn't warm either 26. B: Yesterday was all right 27. A: No, yesterday it was all right 28. B: Yesterday was all right, yes 29. A: But not today, right? 30. B: No, today the weather isn't good 31. A: Well, I don't know, but I think it will be the 32. same tomorrow. But perhaps on Wednesday 33. B: Well, D says that the weatherman is not predicting

< previous page

page_83

next page >

< previous page

page_84

next page > Page 84

34. any improvement 35. A:He doesn't? [deleted material] 36. B: It's a good thing that people can't alter the 37. weather, A 38. A:No, that's true since not everyone would agree, would they? This section starts with a change of topic, which is signalled by a switch across speakers from Alsatian into French. B does give new information: that she went to the village of R yesterday. She switches to Alsatian to elaborate and to explain why: she went to R, in order to vote, even though she does not live there anymore. Her switch may be in response to line 12 which is mostly in Alsatian, i.e. line 12 may have triggered code-switching to Alsatian. The switch may also reflect the more confidential tone of the exchange: legally, she is not able to vote where she now resides, because of her present marital status. A acknowledges the information in French (line 19), and then switches to Alsatian to change the focus of the exchange from the implied but unmentioned legal status to the fact that it isn't really that inconvenient to have to vote in R, since it is not far away. A may realize that this point is perhaps a sensitive one for B, and the change of focus t and of code t may be a form of mitigation or of helping B to 'save face.' Then, the conversation goes back to the weather. The reason may be that A and B feel the need to retreat to something less personal and sensitive than B's marital status (which is only indirectly alluded to). Or it may be that the work of opening the conversation is not over yet, and that chatting about a neutral topic has to continue. But B puts an end to the topic 'weather' by mentioning a piece of folk wisdom: 'It's a good thing that people can't alter the weather' (line 36). Stubbs has already noted that proverbs, clichés, folk wisdom, or popular sayings are used in closing a mini-topic or a conversation (Stubbs, 1983: 24). Schegloff & Sachs also mention that 'proverbial or aphoristic formulation of conventional wisdom can be heard as the 'moral' or 'lesson' of the topic being thereby possibly closed' (Schegloff & Sachs, 1984: 82). Stubbs also mentions that listeners must provide audience appreciation and support to speakers (1983: 30). This may be even more necessary in telephone conversations, where eye contact, gestures, and facial clues are missing. Hence the large number of markers of involvement in the conversation such as d'accord (English 'okay') lines 16, 17, 19, oui (English 'yes'), lines 12, 15, 16, 19, 22, 24, 28, non (English 'No'; used to actually convey agreement with a negative statement), lines 20,

< previous page

page_84

next page >

< previous page

page_85

next page > Page 85

27, 36, and mais oui (English 'Of course'), lines 15, 22. These markers reflect the meta-interactional function of accepting utterances into the ongoing conversation. With other expressions of alignment, convergence and endorsement such as 'it's true' (line 36) and repetitions across speakers, both lexical and semantic (lines 13, 14; 19, 20; 26, 27, 28; 29, 30; and 31, 32, 33), they also mark understanding and agreement. The need for concensus and acceptance is manifest in the use of the French interjection hein (English 'right?' in lines 8, 10, 23, 29, 47). These discourse markers provide signals of what participants think they have communicated to each other, and assure them that they are on the same wavelength. The numerous lexico-referential repetitions and echoing across the speakers show orientation and convergence towards each other. Interestingly, most of the involvement markers are in French in this otherwise mainly Alsatian conversation possibly for emphasis. A further point that can be made is that when speakers have some knowledge about each other they can be somewhat indirect: B mentions that she has 'to open from time to time' (line 21), but she does not specify what it is that she must open. A knows that B is referring to a house which she owns, but which is vacant at the time. Part C 39. B: Tu es déjà passée chez C? 40. A:Non, pas encore 41. B: No nit gse? 42. A:Non, non. Ich ha agruefa ka, s esch awer krank 43. gse salla Tag. 44. S het a dings a, une grippe intestinale, oder 45. ebbis aso gha. 46. Das esch scho n a paar Tag das 47. esch vor eb der H. furt esch. 48. Et puis là, j'ai l'intention d'appeler, euh, 49. pour passer en vitesse si on peut. Non, j'ai pas encore 50. B: ( ) 51. A:Ja, oui, et puis as het nit gsait mir sotta 52. kumma, et puis de toutes manières, on y s'rait 53. pas allés. Si on 54. sait qu'elle se sent pas bien, hein, het's ke Wart. 55. B: Ah, elle a pas dit que vous devez venir? 56. A:Ja, nei wenn se sich nit güet fühlt 57. B: Ja, ja

< previous page

page_85

next page >

< previous page

page_86

next page > Page 86

Translation of Part C 39. B: Have you already gone by to see C? 40. A: No, not yet 41. B: You haven't gone yet? 42. A: No, no, I had called but she was ill 43. that day. 44. She had the thing, the intestinal flu 45. or something like that 46. That's already a few days ago, 47. before H left. 48. And today, I intend to call to go by in a 49. hurry, if possible. No I haven't 50. B: ( ) 51. A: Yes, yes, and anyway she didn't say that 52. we should go by and anyway we wouldn't 53. have gone, if we know that 54. she doesn't feel well, it isn't worth it, right? 55. B: So she didn't say that you should come by? 56. A: Well of course not, if she didn't feel well 57. B: Yes, yes In this section, again, a change of topic is signalled by a change from Alsatian to French, across speakers. B asks whether A has already gone to visit person C. B's response 'You haven't gone yet?' (line 41) echoes the 'not yet' of A (line 40). The switch to Alsatian in line 41 and the secretive tone of voice signal that it is not just a yes/no question, but that B is surprised and curious. A senses the surprise and tries to justify her answer by explaining that C was ill when she contacted her first. And in line 51, A further seems to want to justify herself by mentioning that, anyway, C did not say that she should come by. This time B switches to French to express her surprise and possibly her reprobation (line 55). The switch to French here is probably for emphasis, as was the switch to Alsatian earlier in line 41. A becomes aware of possible misinterpretation on the part of B. B may be interpreting A's statement that 'C did not say that [she] should come by' as a criticism of C. So she hastens to stress with a touch of impatience or annoyance that this was only normal, given the fact that C was ill. Again, there is a switch across speakers, from French into Alsatian, probably for emphasis.

< previous page

page_86

next page >

< previous page

page_87

next page > Page 87

Part D 58.B: Ecoute, A also s blibt derbi 59.A:Ja 60.B: Pour, ich ha jetz nimma agruefa, j'ai pas encore téléphoné 61.A:Ja, uh uh 62.B: A wet's D hat ( ) 63.A:Oui, tu crois oui 64.B: Ja ich rief jetza a hit s mirtag 's esch jo nit 65. jour de fermeture, he? 66.A:Das weiss ich nit. Esch das am Samschtig B? 67.B: Oui 68.A:Le onze, hein 69.B: Oui le onze 70. Ich ha jetza am mittwuch geburtstag, mais 71. mercredi, on peut rien faire 72.A:Ja, ja, ja, da mittwuch esch jetz der Tag oui 73.B: Un der M awer esrcht im Màrz 74.A:En Mars, oui, oui, d'accord oui oui, Un der T 75. het erscht gha, he 76.B: Mir kenna's am mittwuch nit güet macha, alla schaffa 77.A:Nei, ammel, in der Wucha geht's nit güet 78.B: Maintenant elle a dit comme ça, tu vois mir 79. mach der rendez-vous in I 80.A:In I, oui, c'est plus facile 81.B: A sept heures et demie 82.A:Sept heures et demie 83.B: Oui, ça va? Ça vous va? 84.A:Oui, du soir? 85.B: Oui, ça vous arrange? 86.A:Oui on veut bien, hein, oui, oui, oui 87.B: Et puis kummt tanta L jetz mit? 88.A:Ich glaub nit B, j'ai essayé [deleted material] 89.B: Oui, alors D a dit comme ça: après le manger, 90. jo wenn mir gassa han, on va chez elle 91.A:Oui, enfin oui 92.B: Chez D 93.A:Oui 94.B: Moi, je voulais d'abord aller h R 95.A:Oui 96.B: Ich ha z'mittag wella macha, mais ça va pas chez D

< previous page

page_87

next page >

< previous page

page_88

next page > Page 88

97. A:Oui, oui, oui, 98. B:Un drno hat ich z'nacht in R ebbis gmacht, tu 99. vois, wara mir uf R ganga un derta hatt i a barbecue gmacht 100.A:Jo, mais écoute B, 's isch ewerhaupt nit 101. notwandig as mir iglada wara; mir wara froh 102. wemmer ejch numma gsan, pour un café ou pour un après-midi, hein 103.B:EH JO A EH JO Translation of Part D 58. B: Listen, it's all agreed then 59. A: Yes 60. B: For, I haven't called, I haven't called yet 61. A: Yes huh huh 62. B: But D did ( ) 63. A: Yes, do you think so? yes 64. B: Yes I am going to call this afternoon, this 65. isn't their day off is it? 66. A: I don't know that. Is that on Saturday, B? 67. B: Yes 68. A: The eleventh, right? 69. B: Yes, the eleventh 70. My birthday is on this coming Wednesday, but 71. Wednesday, we can't do anything 72. A: Yes, yes, yes, Wednesday is the day 73. B: And M has his birthday in March 74. A: In March, yes, yes, OK, yes, and T just had 75. his birthday 76. B: We can't celebrate on Wednesday, everyone works 77. A: No, of course, during the week it doesn't work 78. B: Now, this is what she said this is the way we'll do it 79. we'll rendez-vous in I 80. A: In I, yes, that's easier 81. B: At seven thirty 82. A: Seven thirty 83. B: Yes, is that ok, does that suit you? 84. A: Yes, in the evening? 85. B: Yes, does that suit you? 86. A: Yes, that's all right with us, sure, yes, yes, yes, 87. B: And now, will Aunt L come along?

< previous page

page_88

next page >

< previous page

page_89

next page > Page 89

88. A:I don't think so B, I tried [deleted material] 89. B:Yes, so D said this: after the meal, when we 90. have finished eating, we'll go to her place 91. A:Yes, well, yes 92. B:To D's place 93. A:Yes 94. B:I, I first wanted to go to R 95. A:Yes 96. B:I wanted to do something in the afternoon, but D can't make it 97. A:Yes, yes, yes 98. B:And then, I would have done something in the evening, you see, 99. we would have gone to R and we would have made a barbecue 100.A:Well, but listen, it isn't necessary at all for 101. us to be invited, 102. we would be happy to just see you over coffee or some afternoon 103.B:COME ON, COME ON Again, a new topic is signalled by a switch from Alsatian to French across speakers. B introduces the main topic, and the main purpose of the call: informing A about the time, date, and place of the planned birthday party. A would probably have found it too direct to inquire about this information early on in the conversation, possibly because she does not want to appear to be only interested in the birthday invitation. 'Listen' seems to function as a mismarker, i.e. it signals that what follows is not necessarily the continuation of or related to what preceded. In this portion of the conversation, code-switching is used for reiteration (line 58), and for emphasis. In explaining the reason for the date of the celebration, B's switch to French 'mercredi, on peut rien faire' (line 71) lends authority to the stated impossibility of having the party on a week day, when everyone works. A does not seem to acknowledge line 71, so B repeats herself in line 76, and this time A agrees that a week day is not a good time to have a birthday party. This reiteration and the apparent desire to have A agree become important, in view of B's later apologies about time and place of the party. Change of topic and emphasis may also be the reason for the switch from French to Alsatian in line 87. B wants to know whether L, an elderly relative who is also invited, has agreed to come. A appears to

< previous page

page_89

next page >

< previous page

page_90

next page > Page 90

mitigate the negative answer in Alsatian. But her use of French seems to be motivated by a desire to stress that she tried to convince L, but was not successful. The 'Oui, alors' in line 89 is resumptive and going back to the plans for Saturday, the eleventh. Again, this discourse marker is a switch from Alsatian to French. After explaining what the current plans are, B mentions what her earlier plans had been: she had thought of having something at her house in R, at noon (lines 94, 96, and 99). Afternoon plans were not possible because of D, B's daughter, who would have been unavailable. A becomes aware that B is apologizing for not inviting her at home. Here is a clear reference to cultural norms in Alsace. Alsatian hospitality traditionally requires that close friends or relatives be entertained in one's home. And B has always entertained A and her family in her home. B may perceive a restaurant as too formal and impersonal a place to entertain relatives, and she may fear offending A. A seems to mitigate the apology by assuring B that she does not expect to be entertained by B, and that all that matters is an opportunity to visit, be it over coffee or for some other non-meal get-together. Most of the apology and the response to it are in Alsatian, perhaps indicating a preference for Alsatian for affective topics. Interestingly, B mentions D as one of the decision makers in the matter, thus sharing her responsibility with someone else. In this section the many repetitions across speakers, about the date, the time, and the place of the party, again show the cooperative nature of conversation and the importance of agreeing on what is being accomplished. Coming to an understanding of when and where to meet is, to use Schegloff's words, 'an achievement ... produced over time [and] incrementally accomplished' (Schegloff & Sachs, 1982: 73). Part E 104. A: Eh ben très bien alors B, hein 105. B: Alors à samedi 106. A:Et puis écoute, écoute, si vous avez un changement, i faut pas vous gêner 107. riefsch weder a on sait jamais 108. B: Eh's wird nit derzwescha kumma 109. A:Oui oui awer nit as du dich tüesch genniera oder ebbis 110. B: Non ich tat ( ) 111. A:Oui, oui, d'accord

< previous page

page_90

next page >

< previous page

page_91

next page > Page 91

112. B: Also's blibt derbi fer am samschtig 113. A:D'accord, d'accord 114. B: Am sept heures et demie 115. A:D'accord, d'accord 116. B: Weisch jo wu's esch gall? 117. A:Ja, ja, au C.O. in I hesch gsait? 118. B: Voilà 119. A:Au C.O, oui oui, d'accord 120. B: Oui 121. A:Non, non, ça on connaît bien, pas de problème, d'accord, B 122. B: Ja, ich has wella z'mittag macha, mais ça va pas 123. A:Non, mais c'est bien aussi comme ça, hein 124. B: Ça va pas chez D 125. A:Oui oui oui 126. B: Z'erscht hah i wella Ding macha am sunntig hah i 127. wella in d' Barga geh 128. A:Hmm, hmm 129. B: Tu vois 130. A:Oui, mais alors avec le temps aussi, mit dam watter 131. B: ( ) het's oi gsait 132. Un der H het a match 133. A:De tennis? 134. B: Ja 135. A:Hmm, hmm 136. B: 's D het gsait er esch igschriwa nit 137. A:Jaja drno müess er geh, nit 138. Jaja er het racht 's esch güet ver na 139. B: ( ) arrangiera bi andera 140. A:Ja ammel, mir han's glicha si on habitait ici on 141. aurait aussi notre horaire et nos 142. B: Mais oui 143. A:'s esch ver alla aso [deleted material] 144. B: Also, A ich will Di nit länger ufhalta 145. embrasse tous de ma part, et puis à samedi 146. A:A samedi donc, et puis bon après-midi en dépit du temps 147. B: Merci, hoffentlich hammer schener watter 148. A:Jo jo, c'est vrai, ce s'rait quand móme mieux, 149. hein, wenn's nit tat ragna 150. B: Oui oui 151. A:Enfin ça fait rien ma müess namma was kummt he

< previous page

page_91

next page >

< previous page

page_92

next page > Page 92

152. 153. 154. 155. 156.

B: A: B: A: B:

was kummt ja ja Also B, bon après-midi, au revoir Au revoir Au revoir Au revoir, A

Translation of Part E 104.A:Well, very well then, B, all right 105.B:Till Saturday, then 106.A:And listen, listen, if you have a change in plans, don't 107. don't be embarassed to call, call us, you never know 108.B:Well, hopefully nothing is going to happen 109.A:Yes, yes, but I don't want you to hesitate to call or anything 110.B:No, I would ( ) 111.A:Yes, yes, OK 112.B:So then, it's agreed for Saturday 113.A:OK, OK 114.B:At seven thirty 115.A:OK, OK 116.B:You know where it is, don't you? 117.A:Yes, yes, you said at the CO in I? 118.B:That's right 119.A:At the CO, yes, yes, OK 120.B:Yes 121.A:No no, we know the place, no problem, OK B 122.B:Yes, first I wanted to do something in the afternoon, but it is not possible 123.A:No, but it's fine like that too 124.B:It is not possible for D. 125.A:Yes, yes, yes, 126.B:First I wanted to do something on Sunday, I 127. wanted to go to the mountains 128.A:Hmm hmm 129.B:You see 130.A:Yes but with the weather, with the weather 131.B:( ) she said it too 132. and H has a game 133.A:A tennis game? 134.B:Yes 135.A:Hmm hmm 136.B:D says he is registered

< previous page

page_92

next page >

< previous page

page_93

next page > Page 93

137.A:Then he must go, of course 138. He's right it's good for him 139.B:( ) have to work things out according to others' schedules 140.A:Of course, we have the same thing, if we lived 141. here, we would also have our own schedule, and our 142.B:Of course 143.A:It's that way for everyone [deleted material] 144.B:All right then, I won't keep you any longer. 145. kiss everyone for me, and see you Saturday then 146.A:See you Saturday then, and have a good afternoon, in spite of the weather 147.B:Thank you, let's hope we have nice weather then 148.A:Yes, yes, it would be nicer 149. if it didn't rain 150.B:Yes, yes 151.A:Well, it doesn't matter we have to take what comes 152.B:What comes, yes yes 153.A:Well then, B, have a good afternoon, good bye 154.B:Good bye 155.A:Good bye 156.B:Good bye, A Part E opens with the initiation of the closing section of the conversation. In fact, this section contains several features which have been identified as characteristic of closing sections of conversations. The use of discourse markers such as 'well,' 'all right,' 'all right, then,' or 'okay' can all signal 'proceeding to close' (Schegloff and Sachs, 1984: 87). That the conversation does not end immediately is due to the fact that closing sections can include other components, such as making arrangements, giving directions or advice, inviting, or reiterating previously talked-about information (Schegloff and Sachs, 1984: 90). Thus, the closing section contains a reinvocation of earlier-made arrangements: the date, time, and place of meeting are again repeated and agreed upon. Interestingly, B also again brings up the fact that she had originally wanted to have the party at home, reiterating reasons beyond her control why she can't (lines 122, 124, 126, 127 and 132). And again, A reassures her that going to a restaurant is fine (line 123), and that she fully understands and supports the reasons given (lines 137, 138, 140 and 143). The redundancy of this topic seems to be a way of emphasizing the apology and confirms Birdwhistell's opinion that behavior 'which appears repetitive at one level

< previous page

page_93

next page >

< previous page

page_94

next page > Page 94

of analysis ... always seems to be of special significance at other levels' (quoted in Stubbs, 1983: 25). The use of Alsatian for the apology and its acceptance again seems to give them special weight. In this ending section, A urges B not to hesitate to call off the invitation, should some unexpected event make it necessary. This can be seen as a move which makes it possible for both A and B to deal with a possible future cancellation of the party. B is already excused, and both A and B can thus save face. Alsatian is also used by A to put and end to this topic with a cliché: 'It's that way for everyone' (line 143). The ending of the closing section begins with line 144 and a switch across speakers from Alsatian into French. It contains another example of a folk wisdom phrase as a device to close a topic or conversation: 'We have to take what comes' which is mentioned by A (line 151) and is endorsed by B (line 152). Interestingly, the weather is again mentioned. It is as if this neutral topic is used to signal the end of the more personal phase of the conversation. The conversation, as expected, ends with good byes in French repeated twice by each speaker. Functions of Code-Switching Heller notes that 'the study of code-switching has moved away from typological and deterministic models relating form and function to each other and to context,' in order to stress a more dynamic model, one in which speakers are constantly constructing, defining, and negotiating the exchange (Heller, 1988: 3). Yet, seeking to interpret the meaning and motivation of code-switching involves being aware of the possible functions and the markedness of code choice. Consequently, some of the functions of code-switching discernible in the above conversations and in additional data which I collected in 1987 and 1988 but which are not included in the above analyses are listed here. Most of these functions have already been found in English/Spanish, English/Hindi, German/Slovenian, and German/Hungarian codeswitching (Huerta, 1978; Gal, 1979, Gumperz, 1982). Some of the following categories overlap. Discourse functions Code-switching has important discourse-signalling and evaluative functions such as emphasis, mitigation, topic change, alignment, endorsement,

< previous page

page_94

next page >

< previous page

page_95

next page > Page 95

and involvement, all of which are evident in conversation 6. Expressive Code-switching can reflect personal feelings, humor, anger, frustration, sarcasm, sadness, disappointment, or defiance. To a husband who is comparing marriage to the army, the wife reacts in French. Husband:Numma der unterschied isch dass ma bim militär gwisst hat wenn's ufhert, un bi der ehe weiss ma numma wenn's afangt. Wife: Ah ben ça c'est pas gentil! Jetz simmer nit amol noch, noch zwei Johr ghirota ... Translation Husband:Only the difference is that, in the military one knew when it would end, but in marriage, one only knows when it begins. Wife: Well, that isn't very nice! We haven't even been married two years ... Language choice can also be a signal of defiance or challenge of authority. A student at the University of Strasbourg told about a fellow student who was tired of what he perceived to be the arrogant and superior attitude of his Parisian professor towards his Alsatian students: he stood up in class and addressed him in Alsatian. Interestingly, an African student had adressed one of his professors in his language, for much the same reasons. A librarian in a municipal library also confided that Alsatian-speaking employees used the dialect as a secret language, to mark their disapproval of, or frustration with, the new head of the library, who was a monolingual French speaker from the Interior. Since it is well known by Alsatians that non-dialect speakers often perceive the use of the dialect as rude, this would be a sure way to annoy someone. Parenthetical In a pharmacy, the-pharmacist and his two employees are helping the numerous clients. A number of medication boxes are stacked up on the counter. He looks at the boxes which his assistant has prepared for a woman client.

< previous page

page_95

next page >

< previous page

page_96

next page > Page 96

Pharmacist:C'est h vous Madame B? (In a lower voice) Esch dass fer Ejch? Do mien ihr ... Translation Pharmacist: Is that yours Mrs B? Is that yours? Then you must ... This is a type of aside. The woman is obviously a regular customer since he knows her by name, and he must also be aware that, being an elderly Alsatian, she is more at home in the dialect. Also, as her regular pharmacist, he may want to convey to her that, even though the assistant helped her, he is still interested and concerned. Reiteration or paraphrase In a conversation about the fact that it is going to take a long time for some books which were sent by boat to another country to arrive to their destination, one speaker says that it does not matter, first in Alsatian, then in French. The reason for this is probably emphasis. Speaker:

's macht nit, ça fait rien

Translation Speaker:

It doesn't matter, it doesn't matter

Quotations The speaker is reporting on a telephone conversation she had with a secretary. She quotes verbatim what she said, perhaps to achieve greater accuracy, authenticity, or authoritativeness. Speaker A: Ich ha numma gsait Speaker B: Hesch nit gsait 's soll saga Speaker A: Si, j'ai dit: 'Dites-lui que L a appelé ...' Translation Speaker A: Speaker B: Speaker A:

I only said Didn't you say that she should tell Of course, yes, I said: Tell her that L. called ...'

< previous page

page_96

next page >

< previous page

page_97

next page > Page 97

Addressee specification In a Protestant church, a woman joins her elderly mother and sits down near her. She turns to some other worshippets, who arc already seated on the same bench, and greets them. Speaker:Bonjour Monsieur, bonjour Madame, (to mother) Bisch ganz vera kumma? Translation Speaker:Good morning Sir, Good morning Madam (to mother) Did you come to sit all the way in front? Here is the switch to Alsatian makes it clear that the speaker is addressing her mother in the more familiar medium of Alsatian. Use of specialized terminology A lady who is showing some shoes in the window of a shoe store is talking to the clerk. The clerk switches to French to use what is for her a certain category of shoes (some shoe samples in store windows carry the label 'pieds sensibles'). Again, the use of the French expression is for greater accuracy. Clerk: Ja, die sin güet un bekwam. Client: Ja, ich will ebbis fer 'pieds sensibles' Translation Clerk: Yes these are good and comfortable. Client: Yes, I want something for sensitive feet. Conclusion Many additional conversational transcripts would be needed in order to see regularities in service/public encounters, or in private exchanges. But even from the preceding limited sample of conversations, several points can be made:

< previous page

page_97

next page >

< previous page

page_98

next page > Page 98

(1) Code-switching can signal the non-objective content of messages: it provides information about speakers' values, beliefs and attitudes. Code-switching in Alsace can convey disapproval, distance, ethnic or political membership, or again consideration, understanding, courtesy, solidarity, friendliness, or apology. The conversations also show that discourse is multifunctional and that, probably, several functions are performed at once. This is not to imply that every code-switching case is meaningful in the same way, nor that the language choices are necessarily conscious, but neither are they random. (2) Knowledge of values, norms, and expectations for a particular communicative event determines language choice. If this choice is not consistent with the norm, friction, misunderstanding, or rejection may result. (3) However, constraints on language choice derive not only from societal norms, but also from the interpretation of the ongoing conversation in light of societal conventions. In making choices, speakers are aware of societal 'macro' norms and extra-linguistic knowledge, but also of the way the interaction itself is unfolding and proceeding. Therefore, as Gal has pointed out, 'no single rule would account for all choices between languages. Statements to the effect that one language is spoken in school-work-street would be too simplistic' (Gal, 1983: 99). Rather, language choice also depends on the 'interpretation which, based on the connotations of codes, speakers know hearers will put on their behavior in light of statuses they occupy and the activities they are engaged in' (Gal, 1983: 68). Thus, community norms of language use, including rules for code-switching, are not unbreakable rules, but rather they are instruments for conveying and understanding communicative intents. Speakers make assumptions about their interlocutors' background, their general motives, or the line of argument they are pursuing. And they are always negotiating about what kind of situation they are constructing, what kind has just happened, and whether or not one situation has given way to another. Scotton's model of markedness incorporates many of the aforementioned points and provides a cohesive framework which helps to explain some of the code-switching examples in this chapter. For instance, the telephone conversation (conversation 6) may exemplify overall switching as an unmarked language choice. The two interlocutors are bilingual peers for whom Alsatian and French are indexical of positively valued identities who may wish for more than one of their social identities to be salient. Each switch may not have special significance (although the switches may have discourse functions): rather, it is the overall switching between Alsatian and French which seems to carry meaning.

< previous page

page_98

next page >

< previous page

page_99

next page > Page 99

On the other hand, conversations 1 to 4 contain examples of switching as marked linguistic choices. Most probably, the unmarked code for service encounters in Mulhouse is French (although much more empirical data would be needed to confirm this). The use of the dialect by customers constitutes a marked choice to a greater or lesser degree in the markedness continuum of service encounters. Since the markedness is a violation of norms, the result is disruptive in a positive or negative sense: in some instances the clerk accommodates to the client, while in others the linguistic choice of the customer is rejected. In apologies also, French is probably the unmarked choice for strangers, but switching to Alsatian, as in conversation 5, may be an example of a 'permissible' marked choice, which conveys mitigation, goodwill, politeness, or solidarity. Furthermore, the relative markedness of Alsatian and French may be different among elderly dialect speakers. (4) Code-switching strategies operate within the more general framework of conversational rules, i.e. conversation is a cooperative activity. The cooperative nature of conversation sometimes manifests itself through the mimicking of, or accommodation to, the interlocutor. The listener may adopt some of the speech characteristics of the interlocutor, such as a regional accent, tempo, lexical or grammatical similarities of speech, or language choice. As was clear in some of the conversations above, not accommodating to another speaker meant not fully cooperating, or showing displeasure. Another characteristic of conversation is that a speaker must establish his or her presence or role, which may vary from one conversational exchange to another. In a very narrow sense, this is an act of identity. and can be accomplished though code-switching. When a speaker makes a language choice, 'he emphasizes one of the possible statuses he and his interlocutor occupy, in an attempt to control the way in which listeners will define the situation' (Gal, 1983: 68). Clearly, listeners are responsible, in part, for the coherence of what they hear. Language choice in a community is meaningful and is interpreted by listeners, i.e. the meaning of a conversation is negotiated during the course of the interaction, rather than directly expressed. In fact, as Stubbs (1983: 176) has noted, there is no one-to-one correspondance between what is said and what is done. There are underlying acts under the surface acts. 'Much talk has less to do with expressing propositional content than with structuring, repeating, emphasizing, mitigating, and generally ''padding.''' (Stubbs, 1983: 178). Code-switching provides a strategy to achieve all the above discourse

< previous page

page_99

next page >

< previous page

page_100

next page > Page 100

Code-switching provides a strategy to achieve all the above discourse functions, and allows bilingual speakers to communicate in the most effective way possible. Code-switching is an important communicative resource, which enhances the subtlety, expressiveness and effectiveness of discourse. Transcription Conventions ?,:. [] () Capital letters

Intonation contours were marked superficially Simultaneous talk Not understandable Stress

Notes 1. I am using Marilyn Merritt's definition of a service encounter as a 'situation of interaction between a "posted" server and a second party (a customer) who invokes the server's participation as an operator of a "serving post"' (Merritt, 1984: 139).

< previous page

page_100

next page >

< previous page

page_101

next page > Page 101

5 Language Use in Southern Alsace Although existing research in Alsace points to a definite shift to French (see Chapter 2), Tabouret-Keller (1985: 14, 15) argues that many additional field studies will be needed to derive a more accurate global view of how the Alsatian situation is evolving. She points out that while existing studies are clear enough, their number is too small to allow researchers to come to definite conclusions and to make assertions. Although she agrees that the number of monolingual Alsatian speakers is clearly decreasing, she suggests that the ratio of bilingual Alsatian/French speakers to monolingual French speakers is less clear. She also cautions that mere knowledge of the number of bilinguals fails to provide crucial information about linguistic competence and the respective use of Alsatian and French. One of these languages may be seldom used in some families, e.g. French in a rural family, or Alsatian in an urban family. Bilinguals have become more numerous in the past 20 years, and opportunities to use both languages have increased, especially in view of increased mobility, facility of communication and travel. But the extent to which the use of Alsatian and French is changing remains uncertain. Accordingly, she calls for more empirical evidence, to broaden our understanding of the complex dynamics of language change in Alsace (Tabouret-Keller, 1985: 14, 15). One method which has been used to measure language shift/maintenance involves the use of questionnaire surveys. Sociolinguistic surveys are based on the assumption that questionnaires can be constructed which cover the most significant aspects of multilingualism, are simple enough to be administered to unsophisticated (linguistically speaking) respondents, and yet permit a revealing statistical analysis. There are, however, serious drawbacks to this approach: perhaps the major one is that self reports are somewhat suspect, and therefore not entirely reliable. There may be several reasons for this: where one language variety is more prestigious than the other, respondents will often tend to overestimate their use of the 'high' at the expense of the 'low' variety or vice versa, if they

< previous page

page_101

next page >

< previous page

page_102

next page > Page 102

support the 'low.' Responses may reflect what the respondents think they do or wish they did more than their actual behavior. Other reasons are related to the testing process itself: some respondents may aim at satisfying the researcher's perceived or assumed goals, rather than at giving accurate information. Questions are necessarily based on categories and classifications, which do not reflect the complexity of factors involved in language use/choice, forcing the respondent to choose from responses that are over simplified. Questions may be ambiguous, and may be interpreted differently from what the researcher had in mind. Finally, the Hawthorne effect may result in altered responses, due to the respondent's knowledge that he is being studied. Another difficulty concerning language use/choice questionnaires relates to the discovery of causes: unlike anthropological research, survey data usually do not provide information about cultural values. It thus becomes necessary to look for measurable causes such as urbanization, migration, or shifts in economic indicators. But, as Fasold points out, 'even a correlation between such measurable values and statistical evidence in the decline of the number of speakers of some language, if it is found, would not establish a cause relationship' (Fasold, 1984: 216). Still, despite the disadvantages and weaknesses of the survey data gathering method, both Gal (1979) and Gorter (1987) found that their survey reports correlated highly with their observations, and Fasold (1984: 216) concludes that 'the careful use of survey data is a valuable tool in the understanding of maintenance and shift'. Objectives Chapter 4 analyzed some examples of in-situ language use in the Mulhouse area. Chapters 5 and 6 deal with the results of a questionnaire survey which was carried out in the same area, during the summers of 1987 and 1988. In an effort to offset some of the disadvantages of questionnaire surveys mentioned above, this study included questions not only on language use/choice, but also on language attitudes. Chapter 5 examines language use, while Chapter 6 explores attitudes among young people and adults in the Mulhouse area. Furthermore, Chapters 4, 5 and 6 together constitute an attempt at combining observation and survey data. The integration of these two approaches has been advocated as particularly useful by researchers such as Gorter (1987: 125) and Stubbs (1983: 234-8). As Labov (1972:119) writes, 'data from a variety of distinct sources and methods, properly interpreted, can be used to converge on right answers to hard questions'.

< previous page

page_102

next page >

< previous page

page_103

next page > Page 103

The objectives of the questionnaire survey were several: (1) to study a heretofore little-investigated area in Alsace; (2) to discover and analyze patterns of language use in the Mulhouse area; (3) to discover attitudes towards the dialect, French and German; (4) to compare my results to those of previous studies, in particular those carried out by Ladin (1979), Tabouret-Keller (1981), Cole (1975), Khettry (1982) and Denis & Veltman (1989). The first two above-mentioned studies depict the linguistic situation in the Bas-Rhin reputedly the most conservative area in Alsace. Except for the Cole, Khettry and Denis & Veltman studies, little data is available for the southern part of Alsace. Cole's study describes primarily a rural or semi-rural population sample. Khettry's study, while comparing urban and rural groups, deals only with school children and with a relatively small group of respondents. In addition, most of the fieldwork for these studies was carried out in the 1970s, while the present analysis describes the linguistic behavior of the current generation of secondary school students and adult population. The research for the Denis & Veltman (1989) study was carried out approximately during the same period as the present study. It covers all of Alsace, and has a much larger sample of respondents than my study. However, their respondents were selected from a more restricted age category 14 to 17 years of age than in the present study, and included no adult respondents. The present study is a more in-depth study of the Mulhouse area, and includes data from over twice as many schools in the Mulhouse area than visited by Denis & Veltman. Besides providing additional information about the linguistic situation in Southern Alsace, this study has more general goals: to investigate the relevance of Robert Le Page's (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985) 'acts of identity' hypothesis to the Alsatian situation; and to shed new light and provide additional evidence on the factors which shape language change in language contact situations. Research Procedure Underlying the investigation were a number of working hypotheses, based on previous studies, relating to language maintenance and language shift: first, it was hypothesized that the analysis of the data would show a statistically significant correlation between language choice/use and speaker variables such as age, sex, place of residence and domain. It was expected that, similarly, a correlation would be found between attitudes

< previous page

page_103

next page >

< previous page

page_104

next page > Page 104

towards language varieties and speaker variables, particularly age. More specifically, expected findings in Alsace included: (1) a lower reported use of Alsatian among younger Alsatians than among the older generations in all situations, even in such a traditionally 'privileged' domain as the family; (2) a lower reported use of Alsatian by female respondents and urban dwellers; and (3) a positive correlation between attitudes towards the dialect and greater use of the dialect. Scope of the Research: Geographical Area The geographical area under investigation is limited to the city of Mulhouse, with its surrounding villages, such as Ottmarsheim and Bantzenheim, and also the small town of Altkirch and its surrounding villages. With its 222,726 inhabitants, Mulhouse is the second-largest (after Strasbourg) metropolitan area in Alsace, and the largest one in Southern Alsace. The city proper had 113,794 inhabitants in the 1982 census, representing a population loss of 4.1% since the preceding census of 1975. This population deficit was partly caused by an exodus from the center of town, first towards the surrounding communities, and more recently, to the more-distant countryside. Towns on the immediate periphery of Mulhouse, such as as Wittenheim, Rixheim, Habsheim and Kingersheim experienced population growth ranging from 13.1% to 40.4% between 1975 and 1982. More-distant outlying villages evidenced even more spectacular population increases, as in the case of Landser (430% increase) and Zimmersheim (80%). These population shifts from the city to surrounding communities and villages may have linguistic implications, although no research is currently available on this matter. The importance of Mulhouse stems from its size, and its role as an administrative, commercial, and industrial center for the region. Mulhouse also acts as a medical and an educational center for the area. It houses the scat of the souspréfecture and the regional judicial courts. It offers a large number and variety of commercial establishments patronized not only by city dwellers but also by suburban and rural dwellers. Of all the 'occasional, extraordinary, or luxury item' purchases which are made in the area, 75% are made in Mulhouse. Regional and international commercial exchanges have been facilitated by the creation of the ports of Ottmarsheim and Ile-Napoléon. Mulhouse became an important industrial center in the nineteenth century because of its textile manufacturing and its potash mines, causing it to be called 'the Alsatian Manchester.' In the twentieth century, these industries lost their preeminence

< previous page

page_104

next page >

< previous page

page_105

next page > Page 105

to auto makers Peugeot and Citröen, and to heavy-machinery construction (Société Alsacienne des Constructions Mécaniques and Manurhin). After World War II, chemical industry was introduced to the area by firms such as Rhône Poulenc and Pec-Rhin. Many people who live in surrounding towns or villages work or go to school in Mulhouse. Thus, Mulhouse is a pole of attraction and influence which causes daily population exchanges between the city and its surrounding area. Altkirch is a small town of 6,000 inhabitants, situated 15 miles to the south of Mulhouse on the edge of the Sundgau area. In its own way, it is also a center of commercial and economic influence for the dozens of small, primarily agricultural, villages of the area. Administratively, it is a chef lieu d'arrondissement and a chef-lieu de canton. And according to INSEE figures, around 2,500 persons in the Altkirch area work in Mulhouse. Scope of the Research: Subjects The research focused on bilingual Alsatian/French speakers. Grosjean, in an informal study of both monolingual and bilingual students, found that fluency in two languages was considered to be the most important factor in the description of a bilingual person (Grosjean, 1982:231). Thus, only those respondents who were fluent enough to carry on an everyday conversation in Alsatian and French were asked to fill out the questionnaires. Admittedly, fluency in a language is a vague concept, yet, it is one that has a clearer, more straightforward meaning for the lay person than for linguists, who do not agree on a satisfactory definition of bilingualism. And while one flaw of my research was that no testing was done to determine respondents' competence in Alsatian or French letting respondents evaluate their own language ability I concur with Lieberson when he writes: it seems more reasonable ... to assume that the population reporting themselves able to speak a given language have a far higher degree · of fluency than the segment of the population reporting themselves unable to speak the language. (quoted in Fasold, 1984: 117) In the schools, I also relied on teachers' assessment of their students' bilingualism: there was no question as to the students' competence in French, but it is probable that among them, there was a wide variety of language ability in Alsatian. The situation was reversed for adults: some were probably Alsatian dominant. I myself spoke to many of the

< previous page

page_105

next page >

< previous page

page_106

next page > Page 106

adult respondents; in other cases, those persons who were asked to find more respondents were bilinguals themselves who were instructed to approach only other bilinguals among their relatives, friends, coworkers, or neighbors. Unfortunately, this study does not provide information about relative numbers of bilinguals and monolinguals in Alsace. In some schools, such as the Lycée Kennedy in Mulhouse, the proportion of students who spoke Alsatian was extremely small. Out of roughly 800 students, the German teacher was able to get together a group of just 13 Alsatianspeaking students! In other schools in Ottmarsheim and Altkirch, the proportion of Alsatian speakers in the student body was higher, perhaps as much as a third, but I was unable to calculate the exact percentage. Some idea of the relative numbers of Alsatian/French bilinguals to monolingual French speakers (or bilinguals in French/other language) can be found in the 1989 study of 2,216 lycée students carried out by Denis & Veltman in all of Alsace. They found that 47.4% of the total student population did not speak the dialect at all or spoke only 'a few words.' Another 18.2% spoke the dialect 'with difficulty,' bringing the total of non-dialect speakers or minimal-competence speakers to 66.6% (Denis & Veltman, 1989: 56). In order to understand the situation of the dialect among the young, then, one must remember that young dialect speakers who answered the questionnaires in this study already form a minority, and that many young people growing up and attending school in Alsace speak French as their home/mother tongue or some other language in the case of children of immigrant workers. The Questionnaire The instrument developed for this study is patterned after several questionnaires included in previous language use and language attitudes surveys, in particular the ones used by Jon Amastae (1978) in the Rio Grande Valley, by Wolfgang Ladin (1982) in Lower Alsace, and by Abdelâli Bentahila (1983) in Morocco. Two versions of the questionnaire were devised: one for school students and one for adults (see Appendixes A and B). Each questionnaire comprised four parts: (1) An introduction explaining the goals of my study to my informants; it stressed that there were no right or wrong answers, and that the individual respondent's experience was of interest. The questionnaires were anonymous, in the hope that respondents would feel freer to answer truthfully.

< previous page

page_106

next page >

< previous page

page_107

next page > Page 107

(2) Questions for demographic information about the informant such as age, sex, residence, educational background, etc. (3) Questions on language use, based on factors that are assumed to have an effect on language choice such as domain, interlocutor, and topic. (4) An investigation on language attitude, in the form of statements for which the informants were to indicate their degree of agreement or disagreement. The two questionnaires were very similar, differing primarily in details on family language use, demographic data, or the workplace. Section 4, on attitudes, was identical for both questionnaires. The questionnaires were written in French, and consisted of closed questions and Likerttype scales. Care was taken to construct relevant and meaningful questions based on previous studies of Alsace and of other bilingual communities. Many of the questions are identical or similar to those posed by previous research. Questions were also based on newspaper articles, material from language promotion groups, and on discussions with interested Alsatians. Content validity was also checked by submitting my questionnaire to selected persons in Alsace and at the University of Texas at Austin. The questionnaires seemed to be too long or too time-consuming, as some were only partially completed and had to be eliminated. Data Gathering/Sampling Method Although random samples are desirable and more reliable, this was materially impossible for this study: mailing questionnaires would have been very costly, and the return probably small. The experience of some previous researchers in Europe was not encouraging: in a study of the Canton of Ticino, Switzerland, the return on a random sample of 1,000 questionnaires was 7.6% (Heyer, 1975). In a region like Alsace, where speaking the dialect was suspect for a long time, the rejection rate would also be very high. For the student questionnaires, I approached the principals of secondary schools, explained the goals of my research, and asked whether I might present my questionnaire to students. Usually, I was put in touch with one or several teacher(s) of German, on the grounds that their courses tended to contain the highest concentration of Alsatian speakers. I thus visited seven schools in three locations: Mulhouse, Altkirch and Ottmarsheim and was able to administer

< previous page

page_107

next page >

< previous page

page_108

next page > Page 108

the questionnaires to 19 classes or groups of students (sometimes, the teacher regrouped dialect speakers from several classes). Adult informants were selected from personal introduction (a method used by Lesley Milroy (1980) in Ireland and Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) in Alsace): friends, relatives, and acquaintances in the Mulhouse area were asked to fill out questionnaires, but also to suggest additional prospective respondents. In order to further diversify the sample of respondents, I also contacted numerous industrial companies in the Mulhouse area, such as the auto maker Peugeot, near Mulhouse, the chemical plants of Rhône Poulenc in Chalampé, and Pec-Rhin in Ottmarsheim; department stores in Mulhouse; the Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques, in Mulhouse; the main post office in Mulhouse; and the administrative offices (the Mairie) of the city of Mulhouse. Unfortunately, I was never permitted to go in person to these various working places, but was always told to send questionnaires through the mail for the chef du personnel to administer them. I collected 251 usable student questionnaires (20 were unusable because of incomplete answers); and 148 usable adult questionnaires were collected (again, nine were unusable). The adult sample is probably less representative of the total adult population than are the students of the total student population in the area. The latter group includes a representative cross section of young people in Alsace, since schooling till age 16 is compulsory, and since my sample includes both university track students and professional schools (lycées techniques). The sample also includes students living both in the city and in rural areas. In addition to the questionnaires, I asked non-Alsatian-speaking students in the classes I visited to write a paragraph on whether they thought that the Alsatian dialect was worth saving or not; I collected 103 short essays on this topic; I thus reached a total of 531 informants. In comparing results, one must also remember that the conditions under which the questionnaires were administered were not the same, especially for the adults, and that the results obtained must be viewed with caution. Although I consistently explained that there were no right or wrong answers, the fact that I was interested in the Alsatian dialect may have altered answers in the direction of viewing the dialect in a more positive light, especially in the case of the students, whose reactions were usually positive, even enthusiastic. Only a few seemed uninterested or negative. Among adults, again, reactions varied: while many welcomed the study and were eager to help, a few refused to answer, on the grounds that they did not want themselves 'dragged in the dirt.' Although my limited experience cannot be generalized, I also found that,

< previous page

page_108

next page >

< previous page

page_109

next page > Page 109

in explaining the goals of my study to company managers or personnel directors, Alsatians were more sympathetic and open to my project than non-Alsatians. Non-Alsatians were either indifferent, irritated, or annoyed by the dialect 'problem' receiving attention. This kind of reaction from monolingual French speakers from 'the Interior' was often mentioned to me by adult Alsatian respondents, and was reflected by the large number of letters to the editor of L'Alsace newspaper, concerning the dialect. Description of the Sample1 In the following discussion, the results for students and adults will be presented separately, to make the differences between the two groups clearer and easier to grasp. Furthermore, all tables, except those comparing student and adult answers, will be presented with the detailed results of only Alsatian (OA), mainly Alsatian (MA), Alsatian and French (A + F), mainly French (MF) and only French (OF) first. A second table will give combined results for only Alsatian and mainly Alsatian (OA/MA), and mostly French and only French (MF/OF). TABLE 7 Characteristics of adult and students samples, in % Students

Adults

Sex Male

43.4

53.1

Female

56.6

46.3

Age distribution 11 - 12 yrs

5.2

17-18 yrs

2.0

13

14.7

18-25

8.2

14

18.7

26-35

18.4

15

28.3

36-45

29.9

16

15.1

46-55

22.4

17

12.0

66-75

6.8

18

5.6

over 75

1.4

Dwelling City

15.9

17.0

Small city

15.7

25.2

Rural

70.1

53.7

Professional

7.6

4.8

Non-professional

86.1

75.5

Profession of father

(Table continued on next page)

< previous page

page_109

next page >

< previous page

page_110

next page > Page 110

TABLE 7 (continued) Students

Adults

Professional

4.4

2.0

Non-professional

92.4

85.0

Professional

-

14.3

Non-professional

-

79.6

Alsatian

26.2

70.1

French

50.0

19.0

Alsatian and French

22.2

2.0

Speak better Alsatian than French

3.3

19.0

Speak better French than Alsatian

66.8

27.2

Speak both as well

28.7

53.1

French

100.0

86.4

German or German & French

-

11.6

German

94.0

-

English

6.4

-

Other

1.6

-

Technical

18.3

-

General studies or university track

81.7

-

Primary school

-

26.5

Secondary school

-

29.3

Technical school

-

29.9

University Student Characteristics

-

13.6

Profession of mother

Profession of respondent

First language(s) learned at home

Perceived language ability/fluency

Primary language learned in school

First foreign lang. learned in school

Type of school attended (students)

Education (adults)

As shown in Table 7, students ranged in age from 11 to 18, the largest group being made up of 15-year-olds. Female respondents outnumbered male respondents (56.6% to 43.4%). Although 10% of the students failed to indicate their parents' birthplace, of those who responded 93.3% had Alsatian fathers and 95.5% had Alsatian mothers. Most came from non-professional families: the largest group of fathers were workers (53.4%) and the majority of mothers were homemakers (57.0%). Half (50%) of the students reported that the first language they learned at

< previous page

page_110

next page >

< previous page

page_111

next page > Page 111

home was French, 26.2% learned Alsatian first, and 22.2% learned both languages at the same time. Yet, when asked about their language ability only 3.3% thought that they spoke better Alsatian than French. Over twice as many students reported greater competence in French as students who claimed to have equal competence in both Alsatian and French. The vast majority of respondents were rural dwellers, although most of them were attending a secondary institution in a city like Mulhouse or a town like Altkirch. Even though the majority of respondents lived in rural areas, only 6.0% of fathers and 1.2% of mothers were employed in agricultural work. Most of the students (94%) studied German as their first foreign language, a vastly higher proportion than the national average in France which is 23.8%. One must bear in mind, however, that a large proportion of my student respondents were recruited from German classes. Adult sample Adults ranged from age 18 to over 75, with the largest group being the 36-45 year olds (29.9%), followed by the 46-55 group (22.4%) and the 26-35 group (18.4%). Most of the adult respondents were non-professionals (79.6%), with the largest group being office employees (20.4%), the second largest workers (18.4%) and the third in managerial or executive positions (17.7%). Only 0.7% of the sample were involved in agriculture, and 3.4% were merchants. A smaller proportion of adults were rural dwellers than in the student sample (53.7% as compared to 70.1%); 25% lived in small towns (5,000 to 19,000 inhabitants), and 17% lived in Mulhouse. With regard to the first language learned at home, 70% of adults reported learning Alsatian first; 19% reported learning French first, and only 2.0% learned both languages together. This is a significantly different pattern from that of the students, who reported learning Alsatian first in only 26.2% of the cases. And whereas only 21.0% of the adults learned French and a mixture of French + Alsatian first at home, this was the case for 72.2% of the students, i.e the younger generations. There is also a sharp generational contrast between perceived language ability: whereas 19% of the adults reported speaking better Alsatian than French, only 0.3% of the students did so. Well over half (66.8%) of the students reported that their dominant language was French, while only 27.2% of the adults felt this to be the case for them. Almost twice

< previous page

page_111

next page >

< previous page

page_112

next page > Page 112

as many adults as students thought that they spoke both languages as well. Whereas it can be stated that 100% of the students learned French first in school, 11.6% of the adult respondents learned German or German and French first. These were the respondents who went to school before 1918 or during the German occupation in World War II. Among adult respondents, a smaller proportion of respondents completed only primary school (26.5%), than did secondary school or technical school (59.2%), a consequence of the lengthening of compulsory schooling after World War II a factor that had important consequences for the linguistic situation in Alsace. The percentage of university graduates in the sample is fairly high at 13.6%. Some initial comments can be made, which may have a bearing on language shift and maintenance. Societal shift can be documented by demonstrating significant changes in mother tongue claiming (the first language learned at home), language proficiency and language use, in successive generations. In the demographic data a very clear negative correlation between age and first language at home is readily apparent. Alsatian is reported as the first language learned at home in only 26.2% of the cases among the students as compared to 70.1% among the adults. Still, Alsatian was still taught to the students in 48.4% of the homes, if one counts the homes where both French and Alsatian were taught concurrently. None the less, it appears that the dialect is not being passed on to the younger generation, as it was to previous generations. What is also striking is the progress of French as a language taught at home. Whereas 72.2% of the students were taught French at home, this was the case for only 21% of the adult respondents. Similarly, claims for language proficiency in Alsatian correlate negatively with age, being much lower among the young than among the adults. Even though 48.4% of the students learned some Alsatian from the time they were born, only 3.3% think that they speak Alsatian better than French. While 72.1% of the adults consider that they have a good competence in Alsatian (those who speak better Alsatian than French + those who speak both languages as well), only 32% of the students think so. A further comment is that the adults already appear quite 'Frenchified' also, since 80.3% of them feel that their competence in French is good. Changes in first language learned at home, and language proficiency along generational lines are readily apparent. The question is, are there similar

< previous page

page_112

next page >

< previous page

page_113

next page > Page 113

generational changes in language use? This is what the questionnaires tried to ascertain. Findings Language use in the family Many studies of multilingual communities have shown the family domain to be the stronghold of minority languages. Individual multi/bilingualism often begins and is nurtured within the family, and in situations of shift, bilingualism often withdraws into the family domain, after it has been displaced from other societal domains. In Alsace as elsewhere, it is logical to assume that the family can play a crucial role in encouraging and protecting the dialect. Questions on language use in the family were presented in the form of dyads (student to grandparent, student to parent, parent to student, etc.) to reflect the fact that language choice depends not only on linguistic proficiency or preference, but also on role relations. Furthermore, dyads also recognize that communication involves speakers and hearers, i.e. production and comprehension. The data obtained in this part of the survey yielded clear intergenerational differences relating to both the age of the speaker and of the interlocutor. Student responses Tables 8 and 8a show that students were most likely to use the dialect when addressing grandparents: close to one-third of them (31.7%) used only Alsatian; and only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian was used in 59.8% of the cases. When one adds the category 'Alsatian + French,' students spoke at least some Alsatian to their grandparents in 86% of the cases. With parents, the use of Alsatian declined noticeably: 13.9% of the students spoke only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian to their fathers, and 10.9% to their mothers. But, when considering the category Alsatian + French, a still fairly large proportion of the students used at least some Alsatian with their fathers (42.5%), and mothers (42.1%). By contrast, when communicating with sibblings, an average of only 3% of the respondents reported using only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian, and 13.35% of them used any Alsatian at all. Thus, in the family, French is the students' preferred language with siblings (86.7%), and even with parents (57.75%). Only

< previous page

page_113

next page >

< previous page

page_114

next page > Page 114

TABLE 8 Language use in the family: students speaking to members of the family, in °/o OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

Respondents speaking to: grandparents

31.7

28.1

26.2

9.0

5.0

father

5.9

8.0

28.6

36.6

21.0

mother

3.2

7.7

31.2

36.0

21.9

younger siblings

0.7

2.1

10.6

26.8

59.9

older siblings

1.3

1.9

10.1

31.0

55.7

OA = Only Alsatian, MA = Mainly Alsatian, A + F = Alsatian and French; MF = Mainly French, OF = Only French TABLE 8a Language use in the family: students speaking with members of family, in % (collapsed figures for OA/MA and MF/OF) OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Respondents speaking to: grandparents

59.8

26.2

14.0

father

13.9

28.6

57.6

mother

10.9

31.2

57.9

younger siblings

2.8

10.6

86.7

older siblings

3.2

10.1

86.7

while speaking to grandparents did the use of French dip: the percentage for mainly French/only French amounts to 14%, only 5% of which is exclusively French. It is interesting to compare the students' report of their own interaction with members of their family to that of their parents with each other and to the respondents (as reported by the students also). Again, as shown in Tables 9 and 9a, intergenerational differences appear: Alsatian is the preferred language for parents between themselves, while their dialect use especially in the 'only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian' category declines sharply when speaking to their children. According to the students, only 9.6% of the parents used only French/mainly French with each other, whereas 69.2% used only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian. Alsatian usage was even higher if one adds the reported use of Alsatian + French: parents used some Alsatian with each other in 90.5% of the cases. Significantly, dialect use of parents with their children was only half of that with their spouses. Furthermore, potentially important language behavior patterns appear: mothers, who usually take primary responsibility

< previous page

page_114

next page >

< previous page

page_115

next page > Page 115

TABLE 9 Language use in the family: parents speaking to other members of the family, in %, as reported by students OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

Parents to each other

37.5 31.7 21.3

4.2

5.4

Father to respondent

13.7 15.0 32.9

15.4

23.1

Mother to respondent

6.6

17.2

21.3

15.2 39.8

TABLE 9a Language use in the family: parents speaking to other members of the family, in % (collapsed figures), as reported by students OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Parents to each other

69.2

21.3

9.6

Father to respondent

28.7

32.9

38.5

Mother to respondent

21.8

39.8

38.5

for their children's socialization, tended not to use Alsatian exclusively as much as fathers did: twice as many fathers as mothers were reported to use only Alsatian (13.7% versus 6.6%). Mothers appeared to use a mixture of Alsatian and French more than fathers did when speaking to their children (39.8% as compared to 32.9%). In fact, the decline of the use of Alsatian by parents with children (as compared with spouses) does not seem to be entirely in favor of French, but rather of a mixture of Alsatian and French. When counting the category Alsatian + French, parents still use the dialect a substantial amount of the time when adressing their children (61.6%). Since the students reported lower percentages of Alsatian use when speaking to their parents than parents talking Alsatian to them, it appears that, sometimes, parents speak Alsatian to their children, but that the latter answer in or partly in French. In effect, Cole (1975) and Khettry (1982) found that children are agents of change in the family domain, and that if children choose to speak predominantly French, 'parents will meet the challenge to speak predominantly French rather than use parental authority to force their children to speak Alsatian' (Cole, 1975: 297). Denis & Veltman also found that parents privilege the use of French with their children and that the current generation of lycéens in Alsace 'speak mainly French at home' (Denis & Veltman, 1989: 53). Adult responses Adult responses, like the students', show intergenerational differences in language behavior which are made clear by Tables 10 and 10a. To

< previous page

page_115

next page >

< previous page

page_116

next page > Page 116

TABLE 10 Language use in the family: adult respondents speaking to members of the family, in % OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

grandparents*

64.6

20.7

8.5

4.8

1.2

parents

33.3

22.4

17.7

11.6

6.8

spouse

22.4

12.2

18.4

15.6

24.5

children**

8.8

7.0

18.5

19.4

46.0

Respondent speaking to

TABLE 10a Language use in the family: adult respondent with members of the family, in % (collapsed figures for OA/MA and MF/OF) OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Respondent speaking to grandparents*

85.3

8.5

6.0

parents

55.7

17.7

18.4

spouse

34.6

18.4

40.1

children**

15.8

18.5

65.4

* there was a large percentage of 'no response' and 'not applicable' (44.2%) ** there was a large percentage of 'no response' or 'not applicable' (22.4%) the question dealing with speaking to grandparents, a large number of adults (44.2%) responded that the situation was not applicable to them, or gave no response. Of those who responded, 85.3% reported using only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian with their grandparents, and adding the percentage for Alsatian + French, 93.8% of the adults used at least some dialect with their grandparents. Significantly, only 6% of the respondents used mainly French/only French in these situations. When addressing their parents, adult respondents used only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian in 55.7% of the cases, and when considering also the category Alsatian + French, then conversation with parents used some Alsatian in 73.4% of the cases. This percentage is higher than that reported by the students to their parents (average of 42.3%): language use with parents as reported by adults and students again underlines generational differences in dialect use: young people today use less Alsatian with their parents than do/did the older generations with theirs. When speaking to spouses, Alsatian use of adult respondents was lower than that reported for speaking to grandparents or parents: 34.6% of the respondents used only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian, while 18.4% used a mixture of Alsatian and French. These percentages are lower than

< previous page

page_116

next page >

< previous page

page_117

next page > Page 117

those reported by the students for their parents: students reported that their parents spoke mainly Alsatian/only Alsatian in 69.2% of the cases (adults to spouses was only 34.6%). When adding the percentage under Alsatian + French, the adults addressed their spouses using some Alsatian in 53% of the cases, but this is much lower than the the 90.5% reported by students for their parents between themselves. The difference between student and adult answers in the reported language use with spouses seems like a discrepancy, but several possible explanations come to mind: the adult sample, unlike the student sample, comprises few workers but a high percentage of office workers and managerial-level employees who presumably use mostly French at work, and who possibly continue to use that language at home. The adult sample is less rural than the student sample. It could be that more respondents in the adult sample are married to non-Alsatian speakers. Or students were perhaps more willing to report Alsatian use than were the adults. Adult respondents clearly favor the use of only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian, when speaking to their parents and grandparents; and 53% of spouses used some Alsatian with each other. When speaking to their children, however, Alsatian is no longer the primary language of communication. Again, a significant number of respondents (22.4%) answered that the situation was not applicable to them, or gave no response older categories in the adult sample did not have children at home anymore. But among those informants who answered the question, the pattern of language use with children is significantly different from that with cohorts or older generations. Of those who responded, only 15.8% reported speaking only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian to their children. When one adds the answers for Alsatian + French, 34.3% spoke some Alsatian to their children while 65.4% reported speaking mainly French or only French. This is a remarkably high usage of French, and again, it is higher than that reported by students for their parents speaking to them. The explanation may be found in the differences between the adult and student samples mentioned above. There may also be historical reasons: parents, especially after the German occupation in World War II, may have heeded the advice or bowed to pressures of educators who advised against speaking the dialect to children. It should also be remembered that dialect-speaking Alsatians were viewed with suspicion after the Nazi occupation, and that often to disassociate themselves from the occupant, they discarded anything Germanic, including the dialect. 1 When looking at the use of only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian, clearly language behavior has changed markedly among the younger generation as compared to their parents' or adult generations, as shown in Table

< previous page

page_117

next page >

< previous page

page_118

next page > Page 118

TABLE 11 Comparative language use in the family of students and adults, in % OA/MA Student

A+F

MF/OF

Adult

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

Respondent speaking to grandparents

59.8

85.3

26.2

8.5

14.0

6.0

parents

12.4

55.7

29.9

17.7

57.7

18.4

spouses*

-

51.9

-

19.9

-

24.8

children**

-

15.8

-

18.5

-

65.4

siblings***

3.2

-

10.1

-

86.7

-

* average of figures reported by students and adults ** question asked only of adults *** question asked only of students 11, which gives figures of language use in the family reported by students and adults. Whereas the adult group addressed their parents in only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian 55.7% of the time, the student generation does so 12.4% of the time with theirs. Even speaking to grandparents, adults report a higher use of the only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian category (85.3%) than do the students (59.7%). Although mixtures of Alsatian and French are still relatively high, the increases in the use of French are also telling: the rule seems to be that the younger the interlocutor, the more likely he or she is to be addressed in French (and the reverse is true too: the older the interlocutor, the more likely he or she is to be addressed in Alsatian). Adults use French more with their children (65.4%) than they do with their spouses (24.8%), which is less than speaking to their parents (18.4%) and is lowest for grandparents (6.0%). A generational use of French was observable also from the student answers. While their use of French was highest with their siblings (86.7%), it was lower with their parents (57.7%) and lowest with their grandparents (14%). Although this question was not asked in the questionnaire, it is probable that most modern-day households comprise only parents and children rather than an extended family which also includes grandparents. This means that grandparents probably no longer play as great a part in the socialization of their grandchildren as they once did, and that there exist fewer opportunities for children to speak the dialect with the group of people most associated with it. Furthermore, the reduced use of only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian of adults with children also weakens the younger generation's proficiency in the dialect, and accounts for the fact that

< previous page

page_118

next page >

< previous page

page_119

next page > Page 119

66.8% of the students versus 27.2% of the adults feel that they speak better French than Alsatian. Language use in the neighborhood Evidence of a generational use of Alsatian can also be found in the data on language choice in the neighborhood. Students and adults alike were most likely to use the dialect when addressing an elderly person, whereas interaction with children was almost entirely in French. Student responses Tables 12 and 12a show the results for the students: they reported that they address an older person on the street in Alsatian in 42.5% of the cases, and when one adds the percentages for Alsatian + French, conversation includes some Alsatian in 77.2% of the cases. However, when speaking to children or strangers on the street, the use of only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian drops dramatically to 0.8% and 0.4% respectively, while French is used in 94% and 93% of the cases. With Alsatian-speaking neighbors on the street, the use of Alsatian reported by the students was much lower than with the elderly: the response 'only Alsatian' was chosen only 3.3% of the time, but the combined uses of only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian (10.6%) and Alsatian + French (21.5%) amount to 32.1%. Still, with neighbors, unlike with the elderly, communication takes place mostly in French (67.9% of the cases), French being used exclusively by 45.9% of the respondents. With police officers, communication takes place almost entirely in French (only one student out of the 251 respondents said he would address a police officers in Alsatian). This high use of French is understandable, in view of the fact that most police officers in Alsace are from other regions of France m this being a deliberate policy of the French government and do not speak the dialect. Police officers, who represent governmental authority, also are more closely associated with the 'official' domain of French. Adult responses Adults, like the students, reported their highest use of Alsatian with the elderly (see Tables 13 and 13a): communication with an older person

< previous page

page_119

next page >

< previous page

page_120

next page > Page 120

TABLE 12 Language use in the neigbourhood, in %, as reported by students OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

Respondent speaking to: older person

22.7

19.8

34.7

12.8

9.9

neighbor

3.3

7.3

21.5

22.0

45.9

child

0.8

-

5.2

18.8

75.2

stranger

0.4

-

6.6

19.3

73.7

police officer

0.4

-

0.8

16.0

82.7

TABLE 12a Language use in the neigbourhood, in %, as reported by students OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Respondent speaking to: older person

42.6

34.7

22.7

neighbor

10.6

21.5

67.9

child

0.8

5.2

94.0

stranger

0.4

6.6

93.0

police officer

0.4

0.8

98.7

on the street took place at least partly in Alsatian in 81.0% of the cases, using only Alsatian/mostly Alsatian 59.2% of the time. With neighbors, adults use less Alsatian than with the elderly, but roughly twice as much as do the students with their neighbors: 29.2% of the adults reported using only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian, and 32.0% used a mixture of French and Alsatian, so that some Alsatian is used by 61.2% of the adults with neighbors. Only in 20.4% of the cases was French the only language used by adults with Alsatian-speaking neighbors. As with the students, French or mainly French is the preferred language when speaking to strangers (87.1%), police officers (94.8%) and children (94.6%). It appears, then, that French dominates in the neighborhood, as shown in Table 14: when addressing strangers, police officers, or children, the reported use of French was very high for both students and adults. Only when communicating with the elderly is the use of Alsatian high in both groups. Student communication on the street appears to comprise more French than that of the adults. While generational factors may be at work

< previous page

page_120

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_121

Page 121 TABLE 13 Language use in the neigborhood or with friends at home, in %, as reported by adult respondents OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

Respondent speaking to: older person

29.3

29.9

21.8

10.2

4.8

neighbor

13.6

15.6

32.0

17.7

20.4

child

1.4

2.0

1.4

18.4

76.2

stranger

0.7

1.4

8.8

23.8

63.3

police officer

0.7

1.4

2.7

10.2

76.2

TABLE 13a Language use in the neighborhood or with friends at home, in % (collapsed results), as reported by adult respondents OA/MA

A + F MF/ OF

older person

59.2

21.8

15.0

neighbor

29.2

32.0

38.1

child

3.4

1.4

94.6

stranger

2.1

8.8

87.1

police officer

2.1

2.7

86.4

Respondent speaking to:

in the situations mentioned above, some other factors such as degree of acquaintance or familiarity with the interlocutor may also be a work. Tabouret-Keller & Luckel (1981) found that rural middle-aged and older Alsatians still spoke the dialect a lot in the neighborhood, and the adults in this study did use the dialect significantly more than did the students, but only when addressing the older generation and neighbors. TABLE 14 Language use in the neighborhood or with friends, in % (collapsed results), as reported by student and adult respondents OA/MA Student

A+F

MF/OF

Adult

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

Respondent speaking to: older person

42.6

59.2

34.7

21.8

22.7

15.0

neighbor

10.6

29.2

21.5

32.0

67.9

38.1

stranger

0.4

2.1

6.6

8.8

93.0

87.1

police officer

0.4

2.1

0.8

2.7

98.7

86.4

child

0.8

3.4

5.2

1.4

94.0

94.6

< previous page

page_121

next page >

< previous page

page_122

next page > Page 122

Language use with friends In stable bilingual communities, where the high and the low varieties are associated with specific domains and community values, the low variety is most strongly associated to kinship networks, home, intimacy, and friendship. But Veltman points out that among immigrant families in Montreal, children continue using their mother tongue with their parents, yet they prefer speaking a national language (French or English) between siblings and friends (Denis & Veltman, 1989: 48). Furthermore, the same researchers point out that language shift studies in the United States show that the abandonment of a dialect or a minority language by adolescents often becomes definitive as they become adults (Denis & Veltman, 1989: 132). Thus, linguistic behavior with friends in Alsace may be especially significant for the future of the dialect. As in the domain of the family and the neighborhood, the data on language use with friends yielded some generational differences. Besides looking at age-related differences in language use, this portion of the questionnaire also sought to find out whether the place of the interaction would influence language behavior: respondents were asked what language they used in various places with friends. Student responses The data obtained for students is shown in Tables 15 and 15a. Just as with siblings, the language of predilection at home with friends is French (87.6%). Only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian is used by only 3.2% of the students, and 9.2% of them reported using both French and Alsatian. Thus, some Alsatian is used with friends at home in 12.4% of the cases. This result is not unexpected, given the trends which have been discovered so far. However, it is hard to understand why students, who claimed to use very little Alsatian when speaking to their friends at home, would report that they speak only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian with their friends in a big department store in 29.7% of the cases, and a mixture of French and Alsatian in 33.3% of the cases. The use of Alsatian at a market is similarly high: students reported using the dialect in 33% of the cases and Alsatian + French in 29.7% of the cases at a market. In a bus or a train, students also reported using more Alsatian with their friends than at home (17.2% only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian; and Alsatian + French in 29.0% of the cases). In this last situation, however, over half of the respondents used mainly French (53.8%).

< previous page

page_122

next page >

< previous page

page_123

next page > Page 123

TABLE 15 Language use between friends in various situations, as reported by students, in % OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

big department store

16.9

12.8

33.3

21.0

16.0

at market

16.1

16.9

29.7

19.9

17.4

bus

7.8

9.4

29.0

26.5

27.3

home

1.6

1.6

9.2

28.4

59.2

café

1.2

1.6

15.3

23.8

58.1

school

0.8

0.8

12.6

17.8

68.0

Student to teacher

-

-

1.6

14.3

84.1

Friends speaking in:

TABLE 15a Language use between friends in various situations, as reported by students, in % (collapsed results) OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

big department store

29.7

33.3

37.0

at market

33.0

29.7

37.3

bus

17.2

29.0

53.8

at home

3.2

9.2

87.6

café

2.8

15.3

81.9

school

1.6

12.6

85.8

Student to teacher

-

1.6

98.4

Friends speaking in:

A possible explanation is that Alsatian may function as a secret language in those situations, as a solidarity language, or as the 'we' language, as opposed to speaking to clerks in department stores and to vendors at the market which takes place mostly in French. Denis & Veltman also noted that the dialect among friends can become a langue de connivence. In a bus also, the dialect may function as an in-group marker which sets the friends off from other passengers. At school, however, few use the dialect with their friends (although 12.6% used Alsatian + French): 85.8% of the students use mainly French or only French. This again is not unexpected since education is strongly associated with the national language, and since the dialect was strongly discouraged or punished in schools until recently. When asked what language they spoke with their teachers at school the categories 'only Alsatian' or 'mainly Alsatian' were

< previous page

page_123

next page >

< previous page

page_124

next page > Page 124

never chosen. 'Mainly French' or 'only French' is used with the teachers by 98.4% of the respondents. Another surprising result was that communication in a café with friends is also primarily in French (81.9%). If Alsatian was used as an 'in-group' language in department stores, at the market, or on the bus, why is the reported use of Alsatian not greater here? One possible explanation for the high use of French in a café may be that cafés (or salons de thé) in Mulhouse or Altkirch are places to be seen and to watch others: peer pressure and peer opinion may be particularly important in such places. Furthermore, the places patronized by students often are the ones which happen to be fashionable among students at the moment. Anything with sophistication or 'snob appeal' is associated to the prestige language, i.e. French, hence the high reported use of French. And despite the fact that, at most cafes, tables are close enough to each other to overhear conversations at neighboring tables, the secret language function sometimes played by the dialect may not be valued in this case because the status function of being in a café and speaking French may become more important. Adult responses Tables 16 and 16a show that with friends at home, 49.0% of the adult respondents reported using only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian (28.6% of this group uses Alsatian exclusively). When one adds the category Alsatian + French, 76.9% of the respondents use Alsatian at least part of the time when addressing their friends. Mainly French/only French is used in 19.7% of the cases, with only 6.8% of that percentage being exclusively in French. This is in sharp contrast to the language use reported by the students, who use mainly French with their friends at home. Adult informants reported that, when in a big department store, they speak Alsatian with their friends in 40.8% of the cases, and 22.4% in Alsatian + French. The percentages of Alsatian reported at the market were very similar: 42.8% speak only Alsatian/mostly Alsatian, and 22.4% speak Alsatian + French. Since the adult group also reported a high use of Alsatian at home with friends, perhaps it can be assumed that Alsatian is just the preferred language with Alsatian friends wherever the conversation takes place. At times, Alsatian may function as a secret language also. Using Alsatian as such is risky since at least some sales persons would understand and speak the dialect. However, as with the students, the

< previous page

page_124

next page >

< previous page

page_125

next page > Page 125

TABLE 16 Language use with friends in various places, as reported by adults, in % OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

in big department store

24.5

16.3

22.4

15.0

19.7

at market

23.1

19.7

22.4

11.6

14.3

at home

28.6

20.4

27.9

12.9

6.8

in a café

8.8

8.8

23.8

19.7

35.4

Respondent to Alsatian friends:

TABLE 16a Language use with friends in various places, as reported by adults, in % (collapsed results) OA/MA

A + F MF/OF

Respondent to Alsatian friends: in big department store

40.8

22.4

34.7

at market

42.8

22.4

25.9

at home

49.0

27.9

19.7

in a café

17.6

23.8

55.1

reported use of the dialect with friends in cafés is much lower than at home, in a department store or at the market: while adult dialect use is higher than the students', it is far lower than in the other situations, possibly because some of the same sophistication connotations associated to cafés mentioned earlier. The results for this question do indicate that place of interaction plays a role in language choice. The sharpest differences between the student and the adult group in language use with friends appear when communication takes place at home: while adults reported using only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian in 49.0% of the cases, students did so in only 3.2% of the cases, a percentage very similar to dialect use with siblings (see Table 17). When adding to this the category Alsatian + French, students use at least some Alsatian in 12.4% of the cases, whereas adults do so in 76.9% of the cases. The results are significant, since the combined effects of being at home and with friends would likely allow for maximum relaxation and openness. That Alsatian is still the preferred language for adults in those circumstances but that young people use French almost exclusively may

< previous page

page_125

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_126

Page 126 TABLE 17 Language use with friends in various places comparison between student and adult answers, in % 0.4/MA Student

A+F

MF/OF

Adult Student

Adult Student

Adult

Respondent speaking to friends in: big department store

29.7

40.8

33.3

22.4

37.0

34.7

at market

33.0

42.8

29.7

22.4

37.3

25.9

at home

3.2

49.0

9.2

27.9

87.6

19.7

in a café

2.8

17.6

15.3

23.8

81.9

55.1

be another indication that the younger generation feels more at home in French, and that French will continue to be their dominant language as they become adults. In situations outside the home, considerations such as marking 'in groupness' or solidarity, using the dialect as a secret language, or showing sophistication may take precedence over other functions. Language use in the workplace The questions on language use in the workplace were only asked of the adults, since they make up the bulk of the work force in Alsace and very few young people work while going to secondary schools. In this section, not all the questions were applicable to the respondents: for instance, over one-third noted that they did not deal with clients, and almost half did not deal with employees (this still seems like a very high percentage of respondents with employees; perhaps, by 'employees' some respondents understood not only one's own, but also persons at work in a subordinate position). As Tables 18 and 18a show, French dominates the work setting for peers, employees, superiors and clients. The more informal domain of peers allows for maximum use of Alsatian, while interaction with employees, superiors and clients yielded very similar results and the lowest use. Interaction with clients allowed the least amount of 'only Alsatian' (1.0%) or 'mainly Alsatian' (3.2%). Interactions with employees are French-dominant: this may be due to the fact that many managerial positions are held by monolingual French speakers. Similarly, many companies employ a large number of monolingual French speakers or foreign immigrant workers, and French becomes the lingua franca. In this domain, as with neighbors, factors such as degree of acquaintance with (or status

< previous page

page_126

next page >

< previous page

page_127

next page > Page 127

TABLE 18 Language use at work, as reported by adults, in % OA

MA

A+F

MF

OF

colleagues

7.0

6.2

28.1

28.1

30.4

employees**

4.0

5.3

14.6

22.6

53.3

boss or manager

5.8

3.3

13.3

15.8

61.6

clients*

1.0

3.2

20.4

25.8

50.5

Respondent speaking to:

* 36.8% of respondents considered this question not applicable or gave no response ** 48.9% of respondents answered that the question was not applicable or gave no response TABLE 18a Language use at work, as reported by adults, in % (collapsed results) OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

colleagues

13.2

28.1

58.5

employees**

9.3

14.6

75.9

boss or manager

9.1

13.3

77.4

clients*

4.2

20.4

76.3

Respondent to:

* 36.8% of respondents considered this question not applicable or gave no response. ** 48.9% of respondents answered that the question was not applicable or gave no response. of) the interlocutor, or formality/informality of the situation may partly explain the greater use of Alsatian with peers, and the lowest use of the dialect with clients. Language use in stores/service encounters Marylin Merritt's definition of a service encounter was adopted and defined as a 'situation of interaction between a ''posted'' server and a second party (a customer) who invokes the server's participation as an operator of a "serving post"' (Merritt, 1984: 139). French seems to dominate in service encounters, although adults consistently reported a higher use of Alsatian than did the students. Student responses As shown in Tables 19 and 19a, the places where students use the most Alsatian are the small neighborhood stores, in particular the baker's

< previous page

page_127

next page >

< previous page

page_128

next page > Page 128

TABLE 19 Language use in service encounters, in %, as reported by students OA MA A + F

MF

OF

clerk in big department store

0.4 -

15.8 83.0

vendor at market

1.3 0.9 11.5

19.6 66.8

small neighborhood store

2.0 2.5 10.2

22.1 63.1

bakery/butcher

2.6 6.8 15.3

24.7 50.6

waiter in café

0.4 -

3.7

16.7 79.3

clerk in post office

0.4 -

2.5

16.5 80.6

clerk in administrative office

0.4 -

1.3

15.1 83.2

Respondent speaking to: 0.8

TABLE 19a Language use in service encounters, in %, as reported by students (collapsed results) OA/MA A + F MF/OF Respondent speaking to: clerk in big department store

0.4

0.8

98.8

vendor at market

2.2

11.5

86.4

small neighborhood store

4.5

10.2

85.2

bakery/butcher

9.4

15.3

75.3

waiter in café

0.4

3.7

96.0

clerk in post office

0.4

2.5

97.1

clerk in administrative office

0.4

1.3

98.3

and the butcher's. The reason for this may be that butcher and bakery shops are often family-operated and informal. Furthermore, these stores are often patronized daily, allowing for the customer and merchant to become acquainted. Consequently, the likelihood of using the dialect is greater in a small store than at a department store. Even so, the use of French remains high at the small neighborhood store (85.2%), and at the neighborhood butcher's or baker's (75.3%). When speaking to a clerk in a big department store, Alsatian is hardly ever used by the students: instead, they use only French/mainly French in 98.8% of the cases. It is not surprising that the use of French with market vendors is also very high, since some vendors like department store

< previous page

page_128

next page >

< previous page

page_129

next page > Page 129

clerks come from other regions and do not speak the dialect. Addressing a waiter, and more formal situations such as dealing with a clerk in the post office or an administrative office takes place overwhelmingly in French. Adult responses For adults, the results in Tables 20 and 20a show patterns which are parallel to those of the students, but with a higher use of Alsatian. Still, in no service encounter is the use of the dialect dominant. As was the case for students, the most likely use of the dialect by adults is in the small neighborhood store where some Alsatian is used by 37.3% of the respondents. A mixture of Alsatian and French is also used at the market (30%), where some vendors are local farmers. However, when speaking to a clerk in a big department store, French is the preferred language for 84.3% of the adult respondents, even though they appear more likely than the students to also speak some Alsatian in that situation (15%). Adults, more than students, tend to use some dialect in all service encounters, but clearly, as Table 21 shows, the primary language in service encounters in the Mulhouse area is French; the lowest reported uses of the dialect were in the department stores and in the official settings of the post office and administrative offices. In spite of the foregoing results, Alsatian is used in some service encounters by merchants and clerks, often with older people, to be helpful, to show friendliness, but also because of the awareness that using the dialect can be 'good business' and can help make a sale. Reported language preference in media (TV/radio) As a border area, Alsace offers more television and radio choices than more centrally located areas in France do: Alsatians can tune in German, Swiss, Belgian, Italian, English and (of course) French channels. Cable channels add even more possibilities. Similarly, radio stations abound both in French and in German. Bilingual Alsatians thus have a wide variety of TV and radio programs to choose from, and the questionnaire sought to find out the relative uses of German and/or French-language programs. The questionnaire did not include questions on Alsatian stations like 'Radio Star' in Mulhouse which had only recently begun its operation at the time of the survey.

< previous page

page_129

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_130

Page 130 TABLE 20 Language use in shopping, in %, as reported by adults OA MA A + F

MF

OF

clerk in big department store

1.4 1.4

12.2

16.3

68.0

vendor at market

4.8 4.8

20.4

21.1

38.8

small neighborhood store

9.5 5.4

22.4

21.1

39.5

waiter in café

1.4 3.4

15.0

20.4

58.5

clerk in post office

-

2.0

5.4

16.3

75.5

clerk in administrative office

0.7 0.7

4.8

16.3

73.5

clerk in bank

3.4 4.1

10.2

15.6

63.9

Respondent speaking to:

TABLE 20a Language use in shopping, in %, as reported by adults (collapsed results) OA/MA A + F MF/OF Respondent speaking to: clerk in big department store

2.8

12.2

84.3

vendor at market

9.6

20.4

59.9

small neighborhood store

14.9

22.4

60.6

waiter in café

4.8

15.0

78.9

clerk in post office

2.0

5.4

91.8

clerk in administrative office

1.4

4.8

89.8

clerk in bank

7.5

10.2

79.5

When looking at the respondents' television viewing and radio listening habits, some differences appear according to the media, as shown in Table 22. While the differences in television viewing are small between adults and students, they are more marked in listening to the radio. A majority of students (60.7%) and a large proportion of adults (53.7%) seem to prefer 'only French' television. A very small group of respondents watch only German television programs, but over a third of both students (37.2%) and adults (38.8%) watch both French and German stations. When listening to the radio, almost twice as many students (62.8%) as adults (34%) reported tuning in only to French stations. Again a very small percentage of all respondents listen exclusively to German radio. But over half of the adults (55.1%) listen to both French and German

< previous page

page_130

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_131

Page 131 TABLE 21 Language use in service encounters, in % comparison between students and adults OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Student Adult Student Adult Student Adult Respondent speaking to: clerk in big department store

0.4

2.8

0.8

12.2

98.8

84.3

vendors at market

2.2

9.6

11.5

20.4

86.4

59.9

store/small business

4.5

14.9

10.2

22.4

85.2

60.6

bakery/butcher

9.4

-

15.3

-

75.3

-

waiter in café

0.4

4.8

3.7

15.0

96.0

78.9

clerk in post office

0.4

2.0

2.5

5.4

97.1

91.8

clerk in administrative office

0.4

1.4

1.3

4.8

98.3

89.8

clerk in bank

-79.5

7.5

-

10.2

-

small neighborhood

radio stations. In talking to respondents, the older generation especially reported that the music played on German radio stations is prettier than on French stations. Much of the favored programming consists of pop music, and also of more regional type of 'folk' music, which is popular on both sides of the border. One-third (32.4%) of the students also reported listening to both French and German radio stations. For those who watched German television, the questionnaire ascertained what types of programs were popular among the respondents. The answers to this question may reflect more the differing tastes of the student and adult groups than any linguistically motivated choice: similarities and differences can be seen in Table 23. The most likely type of German programs TABLE 22 Comparison of media preferences of students and adults, in % TV watching

Radio listening

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

Only French

60.7

53.7

62.8

34.0

Only German

0.8

2.0

2.0

1.4

Both

37.2

38.8

32.4

55.1

< previous page

page_131

next page >

< previous page

page_132

next page > Page 132

TABLE 23 Types of German TV programs watched by students and adults, in % Yes

No

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

Sports

43.4

30.6

56.6

69.4

News

8.0

17.0

92.0

83.0

Variety programs

52.6

53.1

47.4

46.9

Films in German

46.6

41.5

53.4

58.5

Theater

7.6

15.0

92.4

85.0

Documentaries

24.7

36.1

75.3

63.9

to be watched by students and adults are the variety programs. These usually consist of singing and dancing, and make no linguistic demands on the viewers. Percentages for watching films and theater in German were similar for both groups of respondents: films were popular (watched by an average of 44% of all respondents), but theater was not (viewed by an average of only 11%). Although the linguistic demands for watching a film are greater than for watching a variety program, they probably require a lower proficiency of German than do plays: special effects or action in most films would be more explicit and a help in understanding the plot than in a play. More students reported watching sports programs broadcast in German than did adults (43.4% versus 30.6%); and more adults reported watching documentaries in German than did the students (36.1% versus 24.7%). Interestingly, few respondents watch the German news programs, presumably because the French programs report on national developments social, political, cultural of more direct interest to Alsatians as members of French society. When asked for the reasons for media preferences, the most common response was quality of programming and interest (see Table 24). Language did not seem to be a factor for adults, but 9.1% of the students mentioned that it affected their choice of program. It should be remembered that the student respondents were overwhelmingly enrolled in German classes and that teachers probably encourage their students to watch some programs in German to enhance their acquisition of that language. With regard to the printed media, again French dominated in the answers. Some of the students probably do not read newspapers regularly, but most of those who do, read French newspapers or magazines. Adults also mentioned the French press more often than any other. When adding

< previous page

page_132

next page >

< previous page

page_133

next page > Page 133

TABLE 24 Reasons for student and adult media preference, in % Students

Adults

Quality

75.3

76.9

Language

9.1

2.0

Interest

9.5

9.5

Quality + language

2.9

0.7

Quality + interest

2.5

6.8

Language + interest

0.4

-

Quality + language + interest

0.4

0.7

the mention of articles in the dialect (which account for only a very small portion of the newspapers or magazines, usually some poems in the dialect or some weekly column) adults read French papers in 61.9% of the cases, whereas they read the German editions in 10.9% of the cases. This reflects the drastic decline of the bilingual edition of the principal two newspapers in the area, l'Alsace and the Dernièes Nouvelles d'Alsace, in recent years. It would have been interesting to know the type and provenance of German language newspapers and magazines which are read in the Mulhouse area. Unfortunately, the questionnaire did not distinguish between newspapers and magazines printed in Germany or Switzerland and bilingual editions printed in Alsace such as those of the two newspapers mentioned above. It should also be remembered that the students who reported reading German newspapers or magazines were possibly referring to special student publications provided by the German teachers. Although a significant proportion of respondents watch TV programs in German, listen to German radio and read some German language press, French dominates all media for both adults and students. Language use according to function of speech As Austin (1962) pointed out, language is used to do things. Bilinguals have more languages at their disposition to communicate, and it is therefore interesting to know whether the speaker's communicative purpose affects language choice and if some functions are more likely to be used in one language or the other. The results obtained for this portion of the questionnaire (see Table 26) are by no means clear, yet they offer some common trends and contrasts for the student and the adult answers. The

< previous page

page_133

next page >

< previous page

page_134

next page > Page 134

TABLE 25 Newspapers/magazines read by students and adults in % Students

Adults

In French

46.6

47.6

Bilingual

4.8

2.7

German

10.8

10.9

Dialect

23.1

6.8

French + dialect

8.4

14.3

German + dialect

1.6

8.8

Alsatian dialect is used by students and adults alike to complain and to show anger, especially with friends or family: when angry, in general, students use Alsatian in 20.4% of the cases and both Alsatian + French in 27.8% of the cases. Using the dialect to communicate anger is more likely when dealing with family or friends than with strangers. Adults also use the dialect to complain and express anger to persons known to them. By contrast, French is used most often when expressing complaints or anger in stores or to strangers. I suspect that for both students and adults, answers reflected the fact that the Alsatian dialect contains a great many picturesque expletives and expressions for swearing which are sometimes used even by those who otherwise do not speak much Alsatian. Students and adults also reported using the dialect to sing at family gatherings, a function which is not so much communicative but seems instead to express traditional values. Among adults, telling a joke is often done in Alsatian: some Alsatian is used by adults in 52.4% of the cases. Students, however, use mainly French/only French (in 70% of the cases). Appreciation of humor is closely linked to one's own culture, and jokes are often untranslatable; insults or expressions of anger do not always translate well either, and often seem more forceful and more descriptive in one language than in another. Students' low reported use of the dialect for telling jokes may be one more indication of a more 'Frenchified' youth as compared to a more Alsatian older generation. In general, adults reported using more Alsatian for all functions, including affective functions such as encouraging and consoling, and talking about serious topics. And they also were more likely than the students to use a mixture of Alsatian and French. The last three questions were included only in the student questionnaires, and clearly French dominates in abstract thinking, mental calculations, and even in physical activities.

< previous page

page_134

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_135

Page 135 TABLE 26 Function of language: student and adult responses OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

Student

Adult

to tell joke

7.8

26.5

22.2

25.9

70.0

41.4

to be serious

2.4

15.7

6.9

22.4

90.8

57.2

to encourage

11.3

15.6

20.2

33.3

68.6

47.7

to console

6.8

16.3

13.6

33.3

79.6

44.2

to complain

11.4

11.5

20.3

26.5

68.3

36.0

13.5

29.3

31.8

33.3

54.6

30.6

store

1.2

1.4

3.7

14.3

95.1

78.9

when angry

20.4

23.8

27.8

22.4

51.8

28.6

15.0

30.6

28.0

32.0

56.9

32.0

strangers

5.8

5.5

7.5

8.8

86.7

83.0

to flatter

7.5

8.9

12.5

25.2

80.0

55.8

16.0

12.9

31.5

37.4

52.6

38.0

1.6

-

8.6

-

89.8

-

0.4

-

4.0

-

95.6

-

2.0

-

13.3

-

84.8

-

Language used:

to complain to family/friends to complain in

angry with family/friends angry with

to sing at family gathering abstract thinking* mental calculations* physical activity*

Language use according to topic As has been mentioned before, topic is often a crucial determinant of language choice in bi/multilingual situations. The questionnaires contained questions aimed at discovering whether this was so in the Alsatian situation. Interestingly, student and adult respondents concurred in ranking the most and least likely topics to be discussed in Alsatian, as can be seen from Table 27. Alsatian was most likely to be used to talk about the family (43.5% of the students used at least some Alsatian, as did 71.5% of adults). The dialect was used least to talk about the sciences (9.3% by the students. and 32.7% by the adults).

< previous page

page_135

next page >

< previous page

page_136

next page > Page 136

Students, however, were much more likely to use French for both these topics than were adults. After the family, television programs were the most likely to be discussed in Alsatian by both adults and students, but again there were clear age differences, with adults over three times as likely to do so as students. As can be seen in Table 27, French is more likely to be used by the students for all topics. The adults use more Alsatian (only Alsatian/mainly Alsatian and a mixture of Alsatian and French) for all categories. The preferred language for any topic may depend on the source of information, and the setting where these topics come up: science, politics and religion are probably discussed mainly in school, in the media, or in church, and they are therefore associated with French. The differing figures for religion according to students' or adults' answers are due to changes inreligious instruction in Catholic and Protestant churches: formerly, German was the language of religious instruction, and some of the adult informants were instructed in German, whereas instruction is exclusively in French nowadays. TABLE 27 Language use according to topic, in % student and adult responses OA/MA

A+F

MF/OF

Student Adult Student Adult Student Adult Family

15.0

43.6

28.5

27.9

56.5

25.9

Sports

5.3

23.8

14.7

25.9

79.0

42.2

Politics

7.5

21.8

10.8

28.6

81.6

37.4

Religion

6.4

23.1

14.1

31.3

79.5

36.8

Science

3.0

12.3

6.3

20.4

90.8

57.1

Societal problems

4.2

20.4

14.7

30.6

81.1

44.9

Films

6.8

23.1

15.8

22.4

77.3

51.1

TV programs

7.6

25.9

19.4

26.5

73.0

44.5

Conclusion The preceding analysis has investigated language use in Alsace, in various domains: at home with relatives and friends, in the neighborhood, with friends in different locations, and at work. The results given above are straight frequencies. Using a statistical package, for social sciences,

< previous page

page_136

next page >

< previous page

page_137

next page > Page 137

some crosstabulations and chi squares were run to determine the correlation of three factors with the use of the dialect: age, gender, and city or rural dwelling. Below are some preliminary results. The categories of language use were dichotomized into Alsatian (which included 'only Alsatian,' 'mainly Alsatian,' and 'Alsatian + French'), and French (which included 'only French' and 'mainly French'). The statistical significance of my results was often low, when considering only two variables, but went up when considering more than two variables at once, e.g. looking at Alsatian use in a rural/city dichotomy, while controlling for age. The more general results are given here, and are indicative of trends. Age It should already be clear that age is a critical factor affecting language use, since the results reported above distinguished the linguistic behavior of the students from that of the adult respondents in similar situations. Other types of comparisons are possible: the use of Alsatian among students interacting with their parents can be compared to that of their parents' generation with their own parents; one can also differentiate between the linguistic behavior of the generation of the students' parents (those in their thirties and forties) when they address their children, and their behaviour when they address their parents, spouses or cohorts. In each comparison, the differences are striking: the younger generation uses the dialect far less than their parents or grandparents do/did, and in far fewer situations than the adults. The latter still use a significant amount of dialect with older family members, friends, and neighbors, but not with their children. My data reflect the gradual, but undeniable, shift towards French over the last three generations, and thus agree with previous research. Some interesting facts about age came to light during data analysis. While entering the data in the statistical computer program, it was noticed that the language use patterns for students 14 years old and younger seemed different from those 15 and older. When doing crosstabulations, then, student answers were divided in these two age categories. It was found that the younger dialectophone students (14 and younger) were more likely to use the dialect than the older students, in almost every situation. Interestingly, this tendency had already been noticed by Cole in his 1975 study. As an example of this characteristic of the students, Table 28 shows language use in the family, and in a few selected situations (topics and functions of language will be covered in the global language use data later). Percentages for Alsatian are very high, but it must be remembered

< previous page

page_137

next page >

< previous page

page_138

next page > Page 138

here that the category 'Alsatian,' as defined here, includes not only 'mainly Alsatian' and 'only Alsatian,' but also the category 'Alsatian + French,' which was sometimes the highest, and which probably includes instances of very little Alsatian. Thus, the category 'Alsatian' should be interpreted here as 'any Alsatian,' however restricted. In some situations, or with certain interlocutors, age does not seem to be as much of a factor in Alsatian use as in others: with police officers, in school, with clerks in department stores, and with elderly persons, responses for the two student age categories show little difference. But in other situations, including in the family, the younger students use more Alsatian, or are more willing to report that they do. Possibly, as the students pursue their studies, French becomes more important for scholastic success, or perhaps proficiency in French increases so much that, even in the family, the students speak less Alsatian as time goes by. As they grow older, students may also become more clearly aware of the relative prestige of the dialect and French, and consciously use (or claim to use) more French. Among adults, differences in patterns of language use were also noticed for those 44 years old and younger (although sometimes the cut off seemed to be at age 35), and those 45 and older. Crosstabulations were run with these divisions (see Table 29). The data in Table 29 contrast the responses of the two adult age groups. The over-45 group consistently reported using more Alsatian than the younger group. The older group is twice as likely as the younger one to use the dialect with spouses. Differences in Alsatian use between the two groups are smallest when speaking to parents or grandparents, and to the elderly. The difference is salient when speaking to children: a much smaller percentage of the 44-andyounger group (19.6%) reported using the dialect than the 45-and-older group (51.9%). Differences in Alsatian use in department stores, in cafes, and with police officers are also significant, and may reflect a Frenchification of communication in the public domain, from one generation to the next. In each age category, there is a steady decline of the use of Alsatian from a high with grandparents, to failing percentages with parents and spouses, and to a low use with children. Sex Table 30 shows Alsatian use among students, according to gender: girls almost always reported using less Alsatian (categories 'only Alsa-

< previous page

page_138

next page >

< previous page

page_139

next page > Page 139

TABLE 28 Alsatian (any Alsatian) use by students, controlling for age, in % Students' age 14 and younger 15 and older Respondent speaking to: father

51.1

37.0

mother

52.1

35.8

younger siblings

25.0

6.7

older siblings

20.7

9.0

grandparents

88.5

84.3

friends at home

15.5

10.5

neighbors

31.3

32.7

elderly person on street

78.7

76.4

clerk in department store

1.1

1.3

police officer

2.2

0.7

teachers at school

4.1

0.0

friends at a café

23.4

14.9

friends in department store 72.6

56.8

tian,' 'mainly Alsatian,' and 'Alsatian + French,' combined). Differences between the sexes are smallest when speaking with siblings and grandparents, as well as in communicating with clerks in department stores, police officers, or teachers at school: in all those situations, it appears that the norms of language use are 'set.' Alsatian is used most with grandparents, and the elderly, but less with parents. Speaking to friends while in a department store, using at least some Alsatian (as a secret language, or as the 'in-group' language?) is common among both sexes. But French is used in almost all other situations. Additional observations can be made: there is a large difference in Alsatian use with friends at home, with boys reporting over three times more Alsatian use than girls. This is not surprising, since low varieties have often been associated with masculinity, and connotations of toughness, and camaraderie. Interestingly, girls reported using more Alsatian with the elderly: this may be due to girls being more solicitous and anxious to accommodate to the elderly person. But girls used less Alsatian with friends in cafes than did the boys, perhaps because of the gender-related perception of 'sophistication' in these places. As with the students, gender differences are noticeable between women

< previous page

page_139

next page >

< previous page

page_140

next page > Page 140

TABLE 29 Alsatian use by adults, controlling for age, in % Respondents' age 44 and younger

45 and older

spouse

39.7

79.6

parents

71.4

94.1

grandparents

91.5

100.0

children

19.6

51.9

friends at home

70.7

91.6

neighbors

50.5

77.0

elderly person on street

81.7

88.1

Respondent speaking to:

clerk in department store 6.9

26.6

police officer

2.3

8.3

friends at a café

25.8

68.4

friends in department store

52.3

81.6

and men (see Table 31). Except for speaking to parents, grandparents, and neighbors, when both groups reported very similar language use, women almost always reported using Alsatian less than men did. With one notable exception: when addressing the elderly, women just like the girls above t seemed much more willing to use the dialect than men. The explanation of greater solicitude and empathy is again a possibility. The largest differences reported concerned Alsatian use at home with friends, when men reported using far more Alsatian. With men, as with boys, Alsatian may be viewed as the language of masculine camaraderie. City/rural dwelling In comparing the city/rural answers in Table 32, it was found that students who lived in rural areas consistently reported using more Alsatian than the city youth, although the extent of the differences varied. Interestingly, whereas age and gender did not seem to make a difference in language use with grandparents and siblings, rural respondents reported a considerably higher use of the dialect than city respondents. On the other hand, Alsatian use in department stores, with police officers, or in school was uniformly low, suggesting that, as was the case for the variables of

< previous page

page_140

next page >

< previous page

page_141

next page > Page 141

TABLE 30 Alsatian use by students, controlling for sex, in % Female

Male

father

37.8

48.5

mother

37.7

47.7

younger siblings

10.4

16.9

older siblings

11.8

15.4

grandparents

84.5

88.0

friends at home

6.4

20.2

neighbors

27.1

38.7

elderly person on street

82.5

70.5

clerk in department store

0.7

1.9

police officer

1.5

1.0

teachers at school

1.4

1.8

friends at a café

13.7

23.9

friends in department store

58.4

68.9

Respondent speaking to:

age and sex, city/rural dwelling is not a major variable in public situations, which are quite Frenchified. Table 33 shows that the adult city respondents reported using less Alsatian than the rural respondents in most situations. But when speaking to grandparents or to the elderly, place of dwelling did not seem to be a significant factor in language use, since the percentages of responses were very similar. In fact, the use of Alsatian with grandparents was slightly greater among the city than among the rural respondents. Surprisingly, the reported use of the dialect was also higher with police officers or clerks in department stores in the city. The last two results may not be generalizable to the entire population, but the fact that the rural dwellers actually reported using slightly more French may result from the latter's desire not to seem provincial. The difference in use of Alsatian with parents was slight across the two groups, but communication with spouses and children appears more Frenchified in the city. Global language use For this final analysis, questions were grouped in the following domains: (1) family and friends; (2) the neighborhood; (3) shopping; (4)

< previous page

page_141

next page >

< previous page

page_142

next page > Page 142

TABLE 31 Alsatian use by adults, controlling for sex, in % Female

*Male

spouse

53.2

60.8

parents

80.0

81.1

grandparents

94.7

93.0

children

30.0

38.7

friends at home

70.7

91.6

neighbors

62.7

61.5

older person on street

92.1

77.9

clerk in department store

10.4

19.2

police officer

1.9

5.6

friends at a café

34.8

49.3

friends in department store

61.2

67.1

Respondent speaking to:

TABLE 32 Alsatian use by students, controlling for city/rural dwelling, in % City

Rural

father

26.2

47.3

mother

29.4

45.6

younger siblings

5.6

16.0

older siblings

6.5

16.2

grandparents

77.4

90.8

friends at home

7.0

12.9

neighbors

15.9

39.1

elderly person on street

66.7

81.0

clerk in department store

0.0

1.8

police officer

0.0

1.9

teachers at school

1.4

1.2

friends at a café

11.4

20.0

friends in department store

57.4

64.1

Respondent speaking to:

work; (5) administrative offices, banks, police officers, public places such as cafés; (6) topics of conversation; (7) functions of Alsatian; (8) all the preceding together. The mean average of responses per domain (excluding missing data) was calculated for the group of students, and for the adults. The statistical center of these results was found and was determined to be 3.5, i.e. answers below that number indicated greater Alsatian use,

< previous page

page_142

next page >

< previous page

page_143

next page > Page 143

TABLE 33 Alsatian use by adults, controlling for city/rural dwelling, in % City

Rural

spouse

43.1

68.4

parents

78.2

82.1

grandparents

97.2

93.3

children

31.1

38.5

friends at home

71.7

84.8

neighbors

50.8

71.3

older person on street

83.9

85.5

clerk in department store

17.5

13.8

police officer

6.3

3.8

friends at a café

37.1

46.8

friends in department store

57.4

70.0

Respondent speaking to:

whereas numbers above 3.5 indicated more French (in the questionnaires, a 1 signified 'only Alsatian,' a 2 'mainly Alsatian,' a 3 'Alsatian + French,' whereas 4 and 5 corresponded to 'mainly French,' and 'only French'). The results obtained for mean, median, and mode of reported language use, for students and adults, are given in Table 34: they suggest general trends, and they allow some comparisons between domains. As shown in Table 34, the domain of family and friends at home is the one which shows the highest Alsatian use, although the figures for the mean, the median and the mode always reflect the generational differences evident in all my data: students' language use in the family includes less Alsatian than that of the adults. The mode (the value occuring most often in the student and adult responses) is higher for the students, indicating a higher use of French than for the adults, whose most frequent response in this domain was 'only Alsatian.' All other domains are more Frenchified, and show a generational contrast between the students and the adults. The most Frenchified domain is that of public life, which includes administrative offices, post offices, banks, schools, and communication with police officers. Surprisingly, the median is lower for students indicating more Alsatian use probably because language use in buses, trains and with friends at school (none of which were included in the adult questionnaires) yielded some Alsatian use in student answers. At the same time, some situations were included in the adult questionnaires which were dominated by French, but were

< previous page

page_143

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_144

Page 144 TABLE 34 Comparison of global language use per domain of students and adults Mean

Median

Mode

Domains

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults

Family and friends at home

2.915

2.249 3.000

2.000 3.000

1.000

Neighborhood

4.007

3.682 4.200

3.400 4.200

3.400

Shopping

3.810

3.215 3.667

3.400 5.000

5.000

Administrative office, bank, school*

4.481

4.294 4.429

5.000 5.000

5.000

Topics

4.096

2.813 4.500

2.500 5.000

1.000

Functions

4.009

3.124 4.200

3.000 5.000

5.000

Work**

-

3.726 -

4.000 -

5.000

General

3.900

3.259 3.270

4.347 4.814

* There were some differences between the situations covered in the student and adult questionnaires, but mostly they overlap. ** This category was only found in the adult questionnaires. not included in the student questionnaires, thus further skewing the student results towards Alsatian. The most frequently given response in this domain, by students and adults, was 5.000 ('only French'). The greatest contrast between student and adult answers concerned topics, for which most students used more French, and adults used more Alsatian. The modes for adults (1.000, i.e. only Alsatian) and students (5.000, i.e. only French) yielded the greatest gap between adult and student responses. These figures reflect a younger generation which feels more comfortable and able to discuss most topics in French, whereas the adults feel more comfortable using the dialect, and/or French. Interestingly, when functions of Alsatian and French were considered, the mean for adults was 3.000, indicating the use of both French and Alsatian, but the mode was 5.000 (i.e. only French). The contrast between the adult modes, when considering topics and functions of conversation, respectively, may be due to the functions mentioned in the questionnaire. They included several questions on linguistic behavior when angry or complaining. Gal (1979) had already noticed in her research that using the high language often confers more authority and gives greater emphasis to complaints or threats. This may be reflected here, in the apparently higher use of French.

< previous page

page_144

next page >

< previous page

page_145

next page > Page 145

The overall language use figures, which included all the domains above, show that both students and adults in this sample are quite Frenchified, with Alsatian use greater among adults than among students. In conclusion, several points can be made regarding the preceding findings, which strengthen the hypotheses posited at the beginning of this study: they strongly point to a positive correlation of the use of Alsatian with age, sex and city/rural dwelling, with these factors having differential weights according to interlocutor or domain. For instance, age and sex seem to be less important factors affecting language use within the family than a city/rural dwelling. But, in general, younger bilinguals use less Alsatian than older ones. Female respondents use the dialect less than do males, regardless of age. And, despite population movements from the city to the countryside, the dialect remains stronger in a rural environment, than in the city. All these results agree with the findings of previous research on Alsace. The extent to which the use of the dialect has dropped among young people, when speaking to their cohorts, is also noteworthy. It appears that the decline of the dialect may have accelerated within the last generation. This is also a conclusion reached by Denis & Veltman (1989). Furthermore, it is clear that some domains are definitely perceived as Alsatian, and others as French; thus, the factors above carry less weight once these norms are widely accepted: talking to the elderly is associated with Alsatian, whereas department stores, administrative offices, police officers and schools are associated with French (at least when addressing clerks). A study of the linguistic situation in the Mulhouse area would be incomplete without an investigation of attitudes towards languages in the community. This is the aim of Chapter 6. Notes 1. It should also be noted that respondents sometimes considered some questions not applicable or gave no response. This is especially true of adult respondents who were unable to ask for clarification, since the researcher was rarely present at the time they filled out the questionnaire. Thus percentages of responses do not always add up to 100% and occasionally large numbers of respondents did not give an answer (see Table 18).

< previous page

page_145

next page >

< previous page

page_146

next page > Page 146

6 Attitudes Towards Languages in Southern Alsace In an area like Alsace, where three language varieties are in contact, attitudes towards these language varieties play a crucial role in the psychology of individual speakers and their use of language. For attitudes have been shown to have a profound effect on motivation to speak or learn a language; they are linked to views of identity and the desire or lack of desire for group membership and solidarity. Attitudes are affected by and comprise values and stereotypes held by both speakers and non-speakers of any given language or language variety. In most language contact situations, as is the case in Alsace, one language is usually considered more prestigious. Yet, attitudes do evolve, and once-derogatory feelings towards a language or language variety can change to acceptance and respect. Factors such as official recognition of a language, civil rights movements or dialect promotion groups can be instrumental in bringing about these changes. In France, official recognition of regional dialects by the government and dialect promotion efforts in Alsace are relatively recent, and their effect on perception of Alsatian is still unclear. Therefore, determining and assessing what are the current attitudes towards languages in contact in Alsace is very useful in order to explain and suggest future trends in language behavior such as dialect shift or maintenance. Previous findings on attitudes towards languages in Alsace have already been discussed elsewhere in this study (see Chapters 2 and 3). Underlying beliefs and attitudes about Alsatian and French can be deduced from the observation of in situ language behavior such as the conversations presented in Chapter 4. And favorable or unfavorable views of language also emerge from the quantitative analysis of language use data in Chapter 5. This Chapter 6 is based on a more direct method to investigate attitudes: the last portion of the questionnaire asked respondents to indicate their degree of agreement or disagreement with statements about language.

< previous page

page_146

next page >

< previous page

page_147

next page > Page 147

Some statements have less to do with attitudes than with opinions, beliefs, perceptions or knowledge all of them components of attitudes about the language situation. The goals of the inquiry were several: (1) to discover what aspects of the dialect were valued, in particular if the reasons given in favor or against the dialect were connected to the value, communicative, instrumental, or sentimental dimensions of attitudes. (2) to discover attitudes towards the speakers of Alsatian. (3) to assess attitudes towards the teaching or promotion of the dialect. (4) to compare the answers of the students and the adults. (5) to compare the attitudes of dialect speakers to those on non-dialectophone students. (6) to discover whether there is a relationship between favorable attitudes and dialect use. This chapter is divided in two principal sections: the first examines the responses of dialect speakers; the second explores the attitudes of those students who declared themselves to be non-dialect speakers. Attitudes of Dialect Speakers Although questions were random in the questionnaire, they have been regrouped here to focus on specific aspects of language attitudes in Alsace: attitudes towards the dialect, opinions about who speaks the dialect, the teaching and transmission of the dialect etc. I also use some of the concepts proposed by Hofman (1977) and used by Mejías & Anderson (1988: 402) in their work in the Rio Grande Valley. They refer to various dimensions of attitudes: the value dimension is related to the more lasting and perceived intrinsic worth of the language; the communicative dimension deals with 'public understanding, transmitting and communicating information, and interpersonal communication' in a language; instrumentalism refers to personal benefit and practical usefulness derived from choosing to speak a certain language; and the sentimental dimension refers to personal satisfaction and emotions evoked by the use of language. In some statements in the questionnaire, several of these dimensions can overlap. First, we look at the answers to questions which reflect value as defined above and the importance of the dialect as a marker of identity. The results are presented with student and adult answers compared. Note that in the following tables, A stands for 'agree,' rather than for Alsatian, AS for 'agree strongly,' D for 'disagree,' DS for 'disagree strongly,' and Und for 'undecided.'

< previous page

page_147

next page >

< previous page

page_148

next page > Page 148

TABLE 35 Questions about students' and adults' use of Alsatian in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults Alsatian is part of cultural heritage 89.0

93.9 3.2

4.1

I speak Alsatian as often as possible 56.9

62.6 25.4

19.7 17.7

15.0

Alsatian expresses my feelings better

27.0

47.6 40.9

31.9 28.7

18.4

I feel Alsatian first then French

49.8

55.1 31.4

32.0 18.8

8.8

One can feel Alsatian without speaking the dialect

65.2

60.6 24.1

16.3 10.8

20.4

7.7

2.0

A = agree, AS = agree strongly, D = disagree, DS = disagree strongly, Und. = undecided Students and adults alike agreed that the dialect is part of the Alsatian cultural heritage, although the percentage for adults was slightly higher than for students, and fewer adults than students were undecided. Presumably, this cultural heritage is viewed in a favorable light, as something which is worth passing on to the next generation. But the answers to questions on language use showed that, in spite of this favorable attitude, the dialect is not passed on to the younger generation. The difference between attitude and actual behavior is also shown by the lower percentages reported for using the dialect than for considering the dialect as a valuable inheritance: 56.9% of the students and 62.6% of the adults claimed to use the dialect as much as possible (as opposed to 89.0% and 93.9% who considered it as a valuable inheritance). There seems to be a discrepancy here, especially with regard to the students who, according to our statistical data, used very little Alsatian in situations other than addressing the elderly. The discrepancy may reflect positive attitudes of the students towards the dialect which do not translate into practice, or else the students mean that they use the dialect when they deem it appropriate, e.g. with the elderly a rather restricted situation. A quarter of the students and nearly 20% of the adults did not agree that they used the dialect as often as possible, and 17.7% of the students and 15.0% of

< previous page

page_148

next page >

< previous page

page_149

next page > Page 149

the adults were undecided. In fact, few students felt that Alsatian expresses their feelings better than French (27.0%) whereas almost twice as many adults (47.6%) agreed strongly that it does. Still, 40.9% of the students and 31.9% of the adults disagreed with this statement. The statement encompasses a communicative and sentimental dimension in that the dialect is not viewed as the best or most satisfactory or satisfying way to communicate feelings. The responses probably reflect the lower Alsatian proficiency of the students. Fewer adults (18.4%) than students (28.7%) were undecided, possibly because a large percentage of them reported that they spoke French as well as Alsatian. Interestingly, most respondents felt an attachment or loyalty to the region first rather than to the nation: 49.8% of the students and 55.1% of the adults reported feeling Alsatian first. Presumably, attachment to local values over the wider national values would favor greater use of the dialect, but as the use patterns and the above responses have shown, there does not seem to be a clear relationship between values and actual language behavior, unlike the situation in Norway reported by Blom & Gumperz (1972). In fact a majority of respondents, 65.2% of the students and 60.6% of the adults, thought that one does not have to speak the dialect in order to feel Alsatian. A higher percentage of adults than students agreed and a lower percentage disagreed with this statement, perhaps because adults realize that, if speaking the dialect is the principal criterion for being Alsatian, then much of the younger generation no longer qualifies. Furthermore, they the adults bear some of the responsibility for this situation. This apparent detachment of the dialect from Alsatian identity does not bode well for the future of the dialect, and is reminiscent of what Trudgill (1983) found in Greece among adult Arvanitika speakers. The next group of questions taps opinions which reflect stereotypes about age groups, social groups, etc. all of which are important in shaping attitudes towards a language variety. (See Table 36.) An overwhelming majority of the respondents (84.7% of the students and 83.7% of the adults) are aware that younger generations speak less Alsatian than their elders. The greatest difference between student and adult responses concerns the statement about lower Alsatian proficiency among the young. While almost three-quarters of the adult respondents agreed that young people speak the dialect poorly, the percentage of young people (42%) who thought so was much lower; and twice as many students (32.7%) as adults (15.0%) disagreed with that statement. Most respondents (72.9% of the students and 80.2% of the adults) also perceive that the dialect is used mostly in rural areas. However, more

< previous page

page_149

next page >

< previous page

page_150

next page > Page 150

TABLE 36 Questions about groups using Alsatian replies by students and adults in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults Younger generation speaks less Alsatian

84.7

83.7 10.2

8.9

Young people speak poor Alsatian

42.0

72.8 32.7

15.0 25.3

8.8

Alsatian is used mostly in rural areas 72.9

80.2 20.7

12.2 6.5

6.1

The more educated one is, the less one uses Alsatian

30.6 42.2

51.0 25.1

15.0

32.6

5.3

5.4

respondents (42.2% of the students and 51% of the adults) disagreed than agreed with the statement that the more educated one is, the less one uses the dialect. This would seem to indicate that the respondents do not associate the dialect with lack of education, as might be expected from previous studies in Alsace and elsewhere. Still, close to a third of all respondents agreed. The next group of questions have to do with the learning of the dialect, dialect promotion/maintenance efforts, and school policy. (See Table 37.) Most respondents, 78.3% of the students and 85.7% of the adults, seem to think that it is primarily the parents' rather than the schools' role to teach Alsatian to their children. To the statement that schools should teach Alsatian, slightly more students (43.9%) than adults (41.5%) agreed. But about a third of the students and the adults disagreed, with more students undecided than adults. To the statement that Alsatian should be compulsory, the percentage of students and adults declined. Even among those who agreed that the schools should teach the dialect, not all were willing to make this a compulsory topic. Most parents know that the French lycée curriculum is heavy, and that adding a new requirement for learning the dialect may strain the student's already heavy programs. Furthermore, the belief that the dialect is a handicap for school is probably still very strong. 1

< previous page

page_150

next page >

< previous page

page_151

next page > Page 151

TABLE 37 Questions about teaching Alsatian replies by students and adults in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults Parents should be the ones to teach Alsatian to their children 78.3

85.7 9.8

3.4

Schools should teach Alsatian

43.9

41.5 31.5

34.7 24.5

18.4

Alsatian should be compulsory in school

30.7

36.1 38.5

36.7 30.7

23.8

11.9

9.5

The next questions examined the matter of teaching High German versus Alsatian, and also the differing opinions or judgments made about the languages in contact in Alsace. (See Table 38.) Twice as many adults (56.4% versus 28.1% of the students) agreed with the statement that High German rather than Alsatian should [continue to] be taught in Alsatian schools. And the percentage of agreement of the adult respondents to this statement (56.4%) was higher than their support for the teaching of Alsatian in the schools (41.5%). Interestingly, a high percentage of students (72%) disagreed with this statement and/or were undecided. Possibly, they are aware of growing interest in regional diversity in France and think that Alsatian should be given the same attention as Breton, Basque, or Provençal, all of which are taught and studied at the university level. Adult responses appear to reflect a pragmatic approach and a realization that standard languages are probably more economically useful than dialects. Furthermore, some Alsatians, like Philipps or Hug, view the teaching of High German as one way to promote the dialect. The arguments have been advanced by Alsatian promotion groups that High German reinforces the dialect linguistically and provides a source of modernization and new vocabulary (Stauffer, 1979). An informal analysis of lexical borrowings, however, supports the contention that spoken Alsatian borrows lexicon and perhaps syntax from French more than from High German (see Stauffer, 1979). Most respondents, 66.8% of the students and 62.6% of the adults, agreed with the statement that

< previous page

page_151

next page >

< previous page

page_152

next page > Page 152

TABLE 38 Questions about teaching High German versus Alsatian replies by students and adults in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults High German rather than Alsatian should be taught in schools 28.1

56.4 42.2

25.8 29.8

12.9

Knowledge of High German reinforces knowledge of Alsatian 66.8

62.6 17.0

24.5 16.2

10.9

The learning of High German is useful for speaking better Alsatian

51.4

42.9 31.3

41.5 17.3

12.9

Learning High German at a young age will make children use Alsatian more 56.9

33.3 22.0

38.1 21.1

25.9

Knowledge of Alsatian does not hamper knowledge of French 69.4

83.7 18.8

8.9

6.8

11.8

TABLE 38a Status of Alsatian views of students and adults in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults German is more correct than Alsatian 48.5

42.8 24.9

36.1 26.6

17.0

Alsatian can express everything French or German does

55.1

63.9 23.7

25.2 21.2

9.5

Alsatian is like a dialect of German like the dialects of Baden or Rheinland 45.5

65.3 19.8

19.7 34.7

8.8

< previous page

page_152

next page >

< previous page

page_153

next page > Page 153

knowledge of High German reinforces knowledge of Alsatian. However, agreement with the statement that the learning of High German is useful for speaking better Alsatian is less strong, especially among adults: 31.3% of the students and 41.5% of the adults disagreed. A large number of students and adults noted on the questionnaire that the statement should have been worded 'the knowledge of Alsatian is useful for speaking better German.' Certainly, dialectophone students find the learning of German much easier than their monolingual fellow students; the remark also shows that few consider it likely that one would start with learning High German for the purpose of later learning Alsatian. Another language promotion theory advanced by some is that if High German is taught from an early age on, it will encourage the use of the dialect. This is an argument given by Marc Hug from the University of Strasbourg. An informal poll of some teachers of German and other dialectophone teachers shows that very few actually believe that this would happen. Nor did the adult respondents, 64% of whom disagreed or were undecided. The students, however seemed to think that if young children are taught High German in school, they will be more likely to use the dialect in everyday life. Perhaps they have heard or read some of the arguments of dialect promotion groups in the media, or from some teachers, eager to offer their students added benefits to and reasons for the learning of High German. Contrary to what may be expected, given the historical zeal of French schools to eradicate minority languages and to warn parents against the difficulties which bilingual or Alsatian-speaking students will encounter in the proper learning of French, 83.7% of the adults thought that knowledge of Alsatian does not hamper the learning or the knowledge of French. The majority of students also agreed, but fewer of them did so than adults, possibly because some teachers do find many instances of non-standard regional use of French, and point them out to their students as interference from Alsatian, even if this is not necessarily true. 2 The next three statements are also related to the status of High German as compared to that of Alsatian (see Table 38a). Almost half of the student respondents and a large percentage of adults (42.8%) agree with the statement that High German is more correct than the dialect. This is a very common view in communities where standard and dialectal forms of the same language are used. Adults seem a little more secure than the students in claiming that this is not so. Indeed a majority of both students (55.1%) and adults (63.9%) feel confident that the dialect can express everything German or French can. Again the adults

< previous page

page_153

next page >

< previous page

page_154

next page > Page 154

seem more positive and confident than the students. This may be related to the adults' greater Alsatian proficiency: the more proficient one is in a language, the greater the possibilities for expressing most things. The positive views found in this study are somewhat stronger than in Ladin (1982: 181), who found that 47% of his respondents thought that Alsatian could express everything. Yet only 32% of his respondents agreed that classical works such as those of Molière or La Fontaine could be translated into Alsatian. 3 A majority of adults also view the dialect as one among other dialects of German. This question was asked because, historically, there have been times even recently when affirming that the Alsatian dialect was a dialect of German was difficult, even impossible something akin to treason. Monique Wach mentions an older woman's remark about this taboo: 'Now it is possible to say that Alsatian is a dialect of German. Before, you couldn't, it always created trouble' (Wach, 1989: 106). And yet, the author also mentions that in the pamphlets designed by the conseils généraux of the two Alsatian départments to encourage the choice of German as a first 'foreign' language in school, the relationship between Alsatian and German is never explicitly mentioned. The reasons offered for choosing High German first are economic rather than linguistic or cultural: '... because we live in Alsace, on the front step of Germany and Switzerland, and not far away from Austria. Our privileged relations with these countries demand, besides the mastery of French, a good knowledge of German' (Wach, 1989: 107). Perhaps the adult responses show a greater awareness and acceptance of the Germanic component of their identity. Over half of the students (54.5%) disagreed or were undecided about the statement that the dialect was a German dialect. This fact may reflect what Ladin had discovered: that young Alsatians do not see clearly the relationship between the dialect and High German, and that they consider that going from one to the other is equivalent to going to a foreign language (Ladin, 1982: 185). Reasons for this 'disconnectedness' may be found in the fact that detailed historical background of French provinces in this case Alsace is usually not taught and therefore not always well-known or understood by students. The 'option langue et culture régionales' may change this, although it is optional for students. The next group of questions aimed at discovering whether instrumental motivation to learn the dialect was present. (See Table 39.) Roughly half of the students (46.9%) and a large majority of adults (81.6%) agreed that knowledge of French is more useful than knowledge of Alsatian. Interestingly, the adults were far more convinced of the truth

< previous page

page_154

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_155

Page 155 TABLE 39 Motivation for learning students' and adults' response, in % A/AS

D/DS

Und.

StudentsAdultsStudentsAdultsStudentsAdults French is more useful than Alsatian

49.6

81.6 27.1

8.8

23.3

6.8

Alsatian is useful outside of Alsace

54.3

40.8 31.1

42.8 14.7

9.5

Knowledge of Alsatian leads to better job

64.4

54.4 21.1

28.5 14.6

12.2

French is the language of feelings

41.7

-

19.0

-

39.3

-

French is the language of humour

30.0

36.2

-

33.7

-

of this statement than were the students. Perhaps the differences between student and adult responses are due to greater pragmatism and sense of reality among adults; perhaps student answers reflect changing values and more positive attitudes towards the dialect. Perhaps adults, aware of the 'Frenchification' of the younger generation, seek to show their understanding and approval of the trend towards using more French (indeed, they seem to be largely responsible for it). More students disagreed with that statement and more were undecided than adults, whether because of the Hawthorne effect or whether they genuinely believe that the dialect is an asset. The statement that Alsatian is useful outside of Alsace was ambiguous: however, over half of the students agreed with it. In discussions with them, they pointed out that the dialect was useful when traveling in Germany, Switzerland and Austria. Perhaps the adults took the more narrow view of usefulness of the dialect in other parts of France; in any case, a slightly higher percentage disagreed than agreed. Similarly, the dialect fared better with the students than with the adults with regard to the usefulness of the dialect when seeking a job. More students (64.4%) than adults (54.4%) agreed with the statement that the dialect allows one to find a better job, and 40.7% of the adults disagreed or were undecided. Students pointed out to me in informal discussions that working as nurses or as beauticians or

< previous page

page_155

next page >

< previous page

page_156

next page > Page 156

other service jobs, the dialect was useful to communicate with the elderly, since many did not speak French well. Again, adults, possibly because of their greater experience in the job market, did not view the dialect as a major asset. In the three preceding statements students showed more positive attitudes about the usefulness of the dialect than did the adults: this may be a result of the recent official climate of tolerance within the French government; regional languages in France and regional particularismes have gained new acceptance and respect in French society. One might contrast these positive feelings with actual use of the dialect, and see a paradox or inconsistency. The last two statements were included only in the student questionnaires, and tap the communicative value of the dialect as compared to French. A significant number of respondents were undecided (39.3% and 33.7%) regarding both statements, but it appears that a larger number of respondents disagreed with the statement that French is the language of humor than with the statement that it is the language of feelings. This reflects earlier findings in the chapter that the dialect is considered particularly suited to humor. Attitudes of Non-Dialect Speakers The following analysis investigates language attitudes among the non-dialect speakers in the classrooms I visited. 4 Unlike the foregoing discussion, which was based on questionnaires and quantitative analysis, this section deals with student essays, and is qualitative. While their dialect-speaking classmates were filling out questionnaires, these respondents were asked to write short paragraphs to express their opinion of the dialect. I suggested that the respondents address such questions as whether the Alsatian dialect or other regional dialects in France were worth saving, whether they considered the dialect useful, whether they themselves would like to speak it, or whether they would want their children to do so. Except for following these directions, the answers were open-ended and spontaneous. As with the questionnaires, the essays were anonymous, but students were asked to give their sex and age; they were not asked to say whether or not they came from Alsatian-speaking families, but many of them supplied the information; 26 essays mentioned that at least one

< previous page

page_156

next page >

< previous page

page_157

next page > Page 157

parent and/or (an)other relative(s) spoke Alsatian; other respondents were born in Alsace to non-Alsatian-speaking families; still others were from the Interior of France, and a smaller number were children of foreign immigrants. Unfortunately, this information was not consistently given, making it impossible to correlate family background to attitudes. Retrospectively, presenting these students with a questionnaire to fill out would have made data analysis easier. Instead, the answers were spontaneous, and therefore somewhat difficult to organize. Still, recurring comments point to generally held beliefs, thoughts, perceptions, and feelings about the dialect and dialect speakers. Attitudes which come to light are frequently favorable or unequivocally unfavorable but, more often, they are complex and sometimes contradictory. The essays were short (100-250 words), and usually informal in style. They were translated by the investigator. Most of the essays were categorized as favorable: 39 were judged very favorable, while 36 of them were 'mixed,' i.e. the positive observations or feelings were tempered or counterbalanced by more negative ones. Fifteen essays were definitively negative. Still, a strong majority of students (76 out of 103) found something good to say about the dialect. Eleven essays were strictly 'descriptive,' i.e. the students merely mentioned whether they spoke the dialect or not, or gave neutral comments. Two sheets were handed back blank by two 19-year-old boys. Some of the more 'neutral' comments bear on the perceived linguistic situation in Alsace, and are presented first below. Sections examining favorable and 'mixed' comments follow; negative comments and attitudes are presented last. Perceptions about the Alsatian situation The most frequently mentioned 'neutral' comment, reflecting the respondents' perception of the linguistic situation, was that the dialect is disappearing. Another frequent observation is that young people no longer learn or speak the dialect. Respondents also concur that the dialect is spoken mainly by the elderly, and mostly in villages. Less often mentioned comments explain that the dialect has survived better in Strasbourg than in Southern Alsace, and that it is not taught in schools.

< previous page

page_157

next page >

< previous page

page_158

next page > Page 158

Favorable attitudes The favorable observations and comments reported in this section reflect the various dimensions of attitude mentioned earlier: value, communicative, instrumental and sentimental. The most frequently mentioned assessment of the dialect (35 times) concerns the perceived lasting worth of the dialect, i.e. its value. Respondents describe the dialect as an inheritance related to the history and culture of Alsace. It gives the area its 'identity,' its 'charm' and its 'originality.' It adds 'authenticity' and 'interest' to the area. Alsatian is also sometimes seen as part of the 'folklore' of the area, and one 14-year-old boy is concerned that Alsatians dressed in traditional costumes but who don't speak Alsatian may not be accepted as well by the tourists ('... les touristes ne le prendront peut-être pas aussi bien.' 052). Using the dialect is a way to 'show respect' for the history of the region and for Alsatians forebears. The following essays reflect the value attached to the dialect. I think that it would be good to preserve the dialect, because it is an inheritance from our ancestors, it is an homage to them, I don't think that they would want it to disappear. (001, boy, 13) The next essay also stresses the hope and the desire to pass on the dialect to the next generation and expresses concern that the dialect is disappearing: In our village (Wahlheim), Alsatian is a dialect used a lot by old people. I think that the dialect should be taught to the young who would like to learn it, so that it can be passed on to future generations. I hope that in the year 2000, a few people will still speak it because it is less and less spoken by the young. In my family, my mother uses Alsatian when she speaks with my grandmother or with Alsatians. My father never uses Alsatian. As a matter of fact, I too don't really know how to speak it. (021, girl, 12) Communicative reasons are also given for the advantages of speaking the dialect: it 'broadens communicative possibilities' and 'allows one to understand' more people and to converse with them in Alsace especially in the villages, and with the elderly but also in German-speaking countries such as Germany or Switzerland. A few respondents would like to understand the dialect, because they perceive that it often functions as 'a secret language,' and that Alsatianspeaking students can make fun of some of their peers in Alsatian. Many respondents express regret that they don't speak the dialect, because they are unable to communicate with dialect speakers mostly the elderly. This is the case for the next respondent who

< previous page

page_158

next page >

< previous page

page_159

next page > Page 159

also points out the difficulties of Alsatian-dominant speakers in conversing with monolingual French interlocutors. Often I meet elderly persons who speak Alsatian to me; I understand a little bit, but I am embarrassed because I can't answer; and the same thing happens with my grandfather, it is hard for him too, when people don't understand him, because then he is obliged to find the right French words. (073, girl, 15). Many students invoke instrumental reasons for learning the dialect: it can be useful professionally (mentioned 28 times). Respondents consider speaking the dialect as an asset for nurses, beauticians, mechanics, or other service professions when dealing with elderly clients who do not speak French. In addition, finding often better-paying jobs in Germany or Switzerland is easier when one 'can get along' in the dialect, and not have to learn High German or Swiss German. Anticipating the opening of European borders in 1992, one respondent mentions that another advantage of speaking the dialect is that it 'facilitates relations between France and Germany' (079, boy, 16). Besides mentioning the professional usefulness of Alsatian, the following respondent also mentions her perception of why her parents did not teach her the dialect. I think that the dialect is practical for working in Germany or Switzerland. My parents speak Alsatian. I would like for my children to speak Alsatian. I don't speak Alsatian, but I understand it. I don't speak Alsatian because of the school teacher. My brother and my sister spoke Alsatian in kindergarten, and the teacher said that they should stop speaking the dialect. Now my parents speak French with me. (033, girl, 14) Knowing the dialect is also viewed as a great help in learning High German (mentioned 17 times). One student remarks that Alsatian-speakers understand German 'almost automatically,' which no doubt leads to better grades in German class, as suggested by this student: Nowadays, the dialect is used mainly to respect customs and folklore. However, the dialect can help students of German. Yes, I would like to speak Alsatian to be able to understand what people say, to express myself, and to exchange ideas, but mostly in order to be a better student in German. (087, ?, ?) Sentimental arguments in favor of the dialect include that 'it is a beautiful language.' Another student claims that one 'laughs in Alsatian.' Many students mention that one advantage of speaking Alsatian would be the 'pleasure of being able to converse with [their] grandparents or the older

< previous page

page_159

next page >

< previous page

page_160

next page > Page 160

generation.' During 'village celebrations, people sing and talk in the dialect and traditions are transmitted from one generation to the next'. The next essay makes similar points: In my opinion, the dialect is something which must be prevented from disappearing, because it carries the history of our ancestors, their way of life, it is part of folklore. I would like for my children, when I have some, to speak our dialect. It is enriching. Without Alsatian something would be missing. What? It would seem empty, without soul. Alsatian brings life and humor to everyday life. Unfortunately, I don't speak Alsatian well. (011, boy, 15) Another student expresses his regret that the dialect was not taught to him from the start, and his case illustrates the difficulty of 'picking it up later.' In bilingual communities, even young children are sensitive to the subtle messages they get at home and at school about the respective usefulness and prestige of languages. Interestingly, he regards his mother as the principal decision maker in the choice of first language spoken to the children in the family. This respondent also contends that dialects can help preserve regional differences in France: I am sorry not to be able to speak Alsatian. My mother thought that it was preferable to know French before Alsatian, and that I could always pick it up later. My father tried to teach it to my sisters and me, but without success. My parents often speak the dialect between themselves, so that we children won't understand. My oldest sister learned some Alsatian after she did her internship in the hospital. My second sister gets along thanks to German. My opinion on the dialect is very positive: it gives the region its cachet, its originality, it makes it different from other regions. The disadvantage is that, nowadays, all regions are alike; they have lost their originality and everything is unified. Alsace still has some originality, because its dialect is still used quite a bit. (042, boy, 16) Mixed comments The following essays bring up both positive and negative aspects of the dialect. The same positive comments as in the foregoing section are found: that the dialect is an inheritance, a part of tradition which must be preserved; that it is useful in various ways, for communication and for finding jobs in Germany and Switzerland, etc. But, in this group of responses, reservations are expressed which mitigate the positive views of

< previous page

page_160

next page >

< previous page

page_161

next page > Page 161

the dialect. Again some recurring themes can be found relating to value, communicative, instrumental, and sentimental dimensions of attitudes. Value and communication are questioned by respondents who fear that dialects can be factors of divisiveness and friction in a nation. The following respondent shows appreciation and tolerance for the dialect, yet he deplores the lack of linguistic unity in France. Furthermore, Alsatian is not an 'important language' like official national languages, nor is it a mark of education and culture: Personally, I don't care for Alsatian and German. I think that there should be only one language like one kind of money. But each region has its customs and its legends (and the elderly like to speak Alsatian since they have lived all their lives in Alsace and it is their language). The Alsatian language is very close to German. Therefore, it can be useful since Germany is so close. But educated people who go to other countries know the important languages. The Alsatian dialect is disappearing ... At any rate, the Alsatian language is an inheritance; it is like French in France. It is a language that one would like to keep if there were only one language. But the Alsatian language is disappearing because it is not supported in Alsace. (022, boy, 12) Some of the reasons given for not speaking the dialect cover value, communicative and instrumental factors all at once. While the next essay lists many reasons for speaking the dialect, all of them already mentioned, its author considers that dialects are simply not as useful as the national language. When one lives in a certain region, I think that it is normal to have some knowledge of the dialect of that region, especially if one is always going to live there. Knowledge of the dialect can make finding a job easier. Many older people speak only the dialect. In order to be accepted in a village, it is good to know the dialect. However, one should not give the dialect too much importance and the most useful and most widely spoken language is of course French. (020, ?, 15) Another respondent sees the dialect as something to be enjoyed at a personal and private level, but not not at a public one. I am an 18-year-old girl and I don't speak the dialect at all since I am originally from Britanny. I don't think that speaking a dialect is as useful as speaking a national language. However, dialects can be useful personally, for remembrance's sake, to preserve traditions. But, except for using dialects like Breton, Alsatian, etc. to study the folklore or the history of a region, and since there are so few people

< previous page

page_161

next page >

< previous page

page_162

next page > Page 162

who speak them nowadays, I don't think that it is a good thing to absolutely insist on their becoming daily languages at any cost. If one learns the dialect because of one's family, then, one may as well keep it; to have another language is always useful for general culture, but to learn the dialect because it is spoken in the area where one lives is not necessary. (007, girl, 18) One gets the impression that, for some, practicing the regional dialects is viewed as a way to preserve one's French/regional identity in the face of heavy immigration in some areas in Alsace. While the immigrants tend to learn the national language, speaking a regional language becomes a way to mark ethnic membership and solidarity. Dialect speakers can symbolically keep the newcomers out, resist the perceived threats they pose, and make integration more difficult for them. In all fairness, this type of argument and the specific mention of Arabic were only used once. Yet, concern for immigration t and the future linguistic and cultural consequences of it was very real among many adult respondents I talked to, and was reflected at the polls in the Mulhouse area with a high rate of votes for Jean-Marie Le Pen, a presidential candidate who proposed to curb immigration from non-European countries. The student respondent wrote: I think that each region should keep its dialect and that people who are born in this region should know the dialect. Personally, I am originally from the North of France and I know the dialect of that region, and I speak it with my parents and my brothers as often as possible. Unfortunately, France counts more and more foreigners and, in a few years, the French dialect will be Arabic. One notices also that young people speak less and less the dialect of their region. (093, boy, 18). Some students raise questions about the supposedly negative consequences of learning the dialect first on the learning and proficiency in French. The next essay is an example. The dialect is part of the customs of a region. I think that all traditions must be maintained and taught to everyone. A tradition reflects our region and the life of our ancestors. In order to better understand our life today, it is necessary to understand the life of yesteryear. To know the customs of an area allows us to live a better life in our region and to broaden our cultural horizon. However, when young children only speak the dialect with their parents, they risk being victims of the regional language because they do not know how to differentiate between their two languages. So, the dialect has as many advantages

< previous page

page_162

next page >

< previous page

page_163

next page > Page 163

as disadvantages, but on different points. Personally, I do not wish to speak it (I understand a little) nor to teach it to my children. (006, girl, 18) While speaking the dialect has integrative advantages by making it easier for newcomers to be accepted in a new place especially in the villages the converse is true also: when one does not speak the dialect one feels excluded from the conversations in the dialect, and integration is difficult. Communicative barriers lead to feelings of annoyance or resentment: many respondents consider it insensitive or rude when dialect speakers knowingly or unknowingly speak the dialect around monolingual French speakers. I don't speak Alsatian; neither do my parents. In our region, it is a disadvantage, because when people speak Alsatian around us, we feel isolated. In my future profession (beauty shop operator) it is preferable to speak Alsatian, since we have customers of all ages and some do not speak French. Some feel more comfortable when they are addressed in Alsatian. When one comes from another region, integration is sometimes difficult, precisely because of the dialect, because it is not possible to take part in conversation and one feels pushed aside. Yet, I don't feel like learning the dialect, and probably won't exercise my profession in this region. (036, girl, 17). In fact, not speaking the dialect can increase feelings of anomie in persons who already feel rejected by society because of racial or other reasons. The next respondent reacts by rejecting the dialect, at a personal level. Yet, he is able to see the historical and cultural value of the dialect. The Alsatian dialect does not interest me in the least. I find it horrible. But it must be preserved, because it is part of history. I was born of a mestizo father (Chinese/Malagasy) and an Alsatian mother. In society I am like a foreigner because of: my name, my habits, and other things ... therefore I am rejected by others (by persons of Alsatian origin, especially older people). But, little by little, I sense that relations with these types of people are getting better. (089, boy, 20) If non-dialect speakers feel hurt or offended by Alsatian speakers, the latter also have grievances against French monolinguals; they resent the negative stereotypes sometimes attached to speaking the dialect (among the young). Sometimes, dialect speakers are mocked, called by derogative nicknames, and feel rejected. The following respondent has had the experience of being mocked, and is outraged at the injustice of it. One can understand that a young person would soon learn to refrain from speaking a dialect to avoid the embarrassment. The respondent also feels that linguistic unity facilitates economic exchanges within France.

< previous page

page_163

next page >

< previous page

page_164

next page > Page 164

It is too bad that some people reject others because they speak the dialect. But dialects cause problems for the economic future, because we can't communicate between ourselves. Of course, most people speak the dialect but also French. But those who speak only the dialect cannot communicate with the French (when I say 'French' I mean those who do not understand the dialect). When I go to summer camp, the others (the 'French') say that it is shameful to be Alsatian: 'You are peasants, you don't know how to speak French' they say. I can't stand that, it is totally unjust. I wonder if it is the same thing for other dialects. The dialect is disappearing, it is too bad. (001, boy, 13) Some students' reasons for not liking the dialect are unclear. Both sentimental and/or communicative factors could be responsible for the next respondent's dislike of the dialect: perhaps she does not find it beautiful or she does not speak it well enough to enjoy communicating in it. I understand Alsatian well without speaking it. I think it is good for a region to have a dialect. My parents speak the dialect fluently between themselves. My grandparents also. My brother only understands a little. When necessary, I can make an effort and speak it. But I don't speak it because I don't like to express myself in the dialect. (023, girl, 15) The next respondent is mainly unfavorable to the dialect, but her last sentence gives the dialect a backhanded compliment and she thinks that if she spoke it it wouldn't be so bad. In my family, no one speaks or understands Alsatian. Sometimes in the bus, some older ladies speak to me in Alsatian and I feel ill at ease because I don't understand and can't converse. Personally, I would not learn Alsatian because I don't like this dialect. I think it is a strange language for my taste. I think that the dialect can be useful for some people so they can talk without being understood by others. But I think it is unpleasant for the people around. Me, I wouldn't learn Alsatian especially to speak to people around me, but if I knew this dialect, it would not be so bad either. (017, girl, 14) Some respondents seem to think that the reason that young people do not speak the dialect is that it is not taught in schools, and that a course in grammar of Alsatian is necessary in order to speak the dialect. The following essay argues that speaking the dialect hampers the learning of and the proficiency in French. It is difficult to learn Alsatian since it is a language which is rarely taught in lycées. We hear the dialect spoken around us, but we don't know the grammar of that language, which means that we speak the

< previous page

page_164

next page >

< previous page

page_165

next page > Page 165

dialect very very poorly. The dialect is hard to learn since it does not really have a spelling for words. I am not against speaking the dialect. It is a patrimony which must be preserved. But it is not enough to hear it spoken to know it. It is important for a country to respect its traditions. To speak only the dialect as happens in some villages is not a good thing, because young children often accumulate serious deficiencies in French. My parents have always used only French with me. (004, girl, 19) Some students would be willing to learn the dialect, but they see it is as 'difficult,' and 'anyway all the people who speak Alsatian also speak French.' Although, this is only mentioned by one 15-year-old boy, this is probably one of the most compelling reasons for not learning the dialect: most Alsatian speakers are indeed bilingual, and if one does not know the dialect one can always resort to speaking French. Sometimes the dialect is given rather back-handed support, as in the next essay, which seems to say that if dead languages such as Latin can be taught in Alsace, then why not Alsatian? The respondent writes: 'I think that there should be dialect courses, since we learn Latin which is a dead language and which no one speaks' (014, girl, 14). Negative views Reasons given for disliking the dialect are basically no different from the ones mentioned above. The difference between these essays and the previous ones is that they appear to see no redeeming value to the dialect, and are entirely negative, even antagonistic. There is usually no awareness of the history of the region. Most answers in this category betray strong feelings and emotions. A common complaint is the resentment for feeling excluded from conversations, and the frustration and the anomie it creates. The respondent in the next essay feels 'different' and 'dumb.' She feels especially justified for being angry since she lives in France, and feels that French should be the only language spoken: I don't like Alsatian. When one enters a store and people are speaking Alsatian, I find it annoying, because the person who does not understand Alsatian feels dumb and foreign, and feels like he/she is different. I know that we are living in Alsace, but here French should be spoken, not Alsatian. What is more annoying is that when one wants to work in a retirement home, it is necessary to be able to speak Alsatian or it is not possible to communicate with elderly persons. (027, girl, 17).

< previous page

page_165

next page >

< previous page

page_166

next page > Page 166

The next respondent, like the preceding one, objects to languages other than French being spoken in France, but he seems to resent especially that Alsatian is a dialect of German, i.e. a foreign language. He, also resents that a dialect he does not speak or understand is spoken in his presence. I don't think that Alsatian should exist [sic], we are in France, and we should speak French. I have noticed that Alsatian is found only in little towns because they are populated by old people in great part, while in the big cities one does not hear a word of Alsatian, and that's better. In the little villages, one does not even feel like one is in France. Alsatian resembles German more than French, and that's not normal! [sic] Alsace is a rather foreign region because when one arrives in a store, one does not understand what is being said. It's unpleasant. I don't like Alsatian. (041, boy, 14) Another emotional response is given by the next respondent, who experienced a difficult adjustment to life in a small village where the dialect was still used a lot. I come from the North of France, and I arrived in Alsace about 8 years ago. I live in a small village of 400 inhabitants, and I had a very hard time getting used to life here because practically everyone speaks Alsatian. Frankly I don't like this dialect which is closer to German than to French. In many Alsatian families, children are taught Alsatian first. We are in France, and everyone should be able to speak French. In my village a quarter of the population does not know how to speak French. I find that incredible! I feel myself more in Germany than in France. Furthermore, one is poorly accepted by the villagers when one does not speak Alsatian. That's why I don't appreciate the dialect. (040, boy, 14) Some respondents do not like the dialect because it is not a 'real' language and therefore not useful, unlike standard languages. I don't think, at least as far as I am concerned, that Alsatian is useful for me. Furthermore, it isn't a language but a dialect derived from German, and it is better to learn a living language which can be useful in lots of countries (especially after 1992), whereas Alsatian is only used in Alsace and won't be useful in such case. I have never tried to understand Alsatian, nor to speak it, and I must say that I rather frown on people speaking it in front of people who do not understand it. What I also hate is a very pronounced Alsatian accent in French. (054, boy, 16) The next respondent rejects the idea that Alsatian helps those who are learning High German, and finds that Alsatian speakers make mistakes

< previous page

page_166

next page >

< previous page

page_167

next page > Page 167

because of interference of the dialect with standard German. Not only does Alsatian hamper German, but it also hampers French, and she thinks it preferable to learn French well first. Furthermore, it isn't a language! My family does not speak Alsatian at all. I am not about to learn this dialect, because I don't like it at all. I find that people who are learning and who speak Alsatian make lots of vocabulary mistakes, because they mix the dialect with German. Often, some of my classmates speak Alsatian around me, and it annoys me, and I feel ill at ease because I don't understand a word. Some people say that it is important to know how to speak Alsatian, but personally I think it's ridiculous because it is better to be able to speak French correctly first, and then to start to learn Alsatian, if one really wants to learn how to speak it. For me, knowing Alsatian is something useless because one is not more cultured when one knows the dialect. And besides, it isn't a language, it's nothing! lit is] deformed German. (037, girl, 17) The next respondent considers herself Alsatian, but dislikes the Alsatian accent when speaking French, which is an embarrassment to her. The Alsatian dialect is something which does not interest me at all. It is a language which I hate. When I hear an Alsatian speaking with a heavy accent on television, I am almost ashamed of being Alsatian. (003, girl, 19). While some respondents from Alsatian families do not value the dialect, neither do some of the foreign immigrants for whom the wider language of the community is more useful. The next respondent has noticed the lack of prestige of the dialect among the young. Alsatian does not interest me in the least. It is spoken only by older people. Furthermore I am of foreign origin, and I speak my mother tongue at home with my parents. And the young people who speak Alsatian are not well regarded by other young people. (098, boy, 17) Conclusion The foregoing investigation reveals some of the generally held attitudes and stereotypes about Alsatian, French, and German in the Mulhouse area. The data establish the variety of considerations which shape favorable or unfavorable views of the dialect: its value as a symbol of group/ethnic

< previous page

page_167

next page >

< previous page

page_168

next page > Page 168

identity and one's own concomitant view of personal identity; its perceived intrinsic linguistic value; its communicative usefulness; its perceived present status and prestige vis-à-vis French and German; its appropriateness or lack thereof in specific situations; and characteristics of its users. The data reveal an interesting mixture of feelings towards the dialect ranging from admiration, tolerance, nostalgia, and pragmatism, to hostility, disdain, annoyance, and envy. Certainly they confirm that language, in Fishman's words, is not merely a carrier of content whether latent or manifest. Language itself is content, a referent for loyalties and animosities, an indicator of social statuses and personal relationships, a marker of situations and topics as well as of the societal goals and the large-scale value-laden arenas of interaction that typify every speech community. (Fishman, 1970) The data also permit comparisons between student and adult responses, as well as between dialect speakers and nondialect speakers. It is useful here to review briefly the findings. First, the answers of the dialect speakers are examined, and, secondly, those of non-dialect speakers are taken up. Among the dialect speakers, who included both students and adults, there was both agreement and disagreement on specific points. The highest percentage of agreement between the younger and the older generation concerned the perceived value of the dialect. A strong majority viewed the dialect as a patrimony, i.e. something of lasting worth with inextricable ties to the history and culture of the region. Remarkable agreement across generations also existed on the perception of the current linguistic situation: respondents saw a decline of the use of the dialect among young people, and a tendency towards the dialect being used primarily in (or restricted to) rural areas and among the elderly. There was also agreement that it is the responsibility of parents, rather than the schools, to pass on the dialect to their children, and that a more educated person does not necessarily speak the dialect any less than a less educated one. This is a rather surprising finding, since education is related to social status, and most previous studies of Alsace have shown dialect use to be lower in middle and upper classes than in the working class. This answer may reflect an awareness of a recent trend which, in some sense, makes Alsatian fashionable. Wach (1989) noted that the dialect can be used in a symbolic manner by politicians or other public figures, for instance, and that intellectuals are often among the strongest defenders and promoters of the dialect. There was disagreement on such matters as the teaching of Alsatian in the schools, and the usefulness of the dialect. The students were rather

< previous page

page_168

next page >

< previous page

page_169

next page > Page 169

more open to its teaching than the adults, who considered High German more useful or appropriate. Adults, however, were not as likely as students to think that the teaching of High German in the schools would encourage young people to speak more Alsatian. As for the relative usefulness of the dialect and French, French is viewed as the most useful language, but Alsatian fares very well among the young, who see the dialect as an advantage for travelling and seeking jobs in German-speaking countries, and in the exercise of a profession. Linguistically, adults seemed less norm-conscious than the young about correctness, and more confident about the expressive capabilities of the dialect (this is no doubt related to greater proficiency in Alsatian among the older generations). They were also more willing than the young to acknowledge the relationship of Alsatian with German dialects (although a significant percentage of the students 45.5% also did so). Dialect-speaking adults and students concurred that speaking the dialect is not necessary in order to feel Alsatian. Although there is no doubt that many factors are involved in an individual's identity, of which language is but one, speaking a given language has often been regarded as essential to group identity. Therefore, the apparent dissociation of the language from the regional identity, even among dialect speakers, does not bode well for the dialect. In the answers of non-dialect speakers, all of whom were students, generalities are extractable which reflect favorable, mixed, or unfavorable views of the dialect. Roughly two-thirds of the essays contained favorable comments about the dialect, although some of those also voiced reservations; a handful of essays were very negative. The majority of the respondents attached value to the dialect as a cultural and linguistic heritage, closely associated to the region. A majority of non-dialect speakers also saw the usefulness of the dialect for communicative and instrumental purposes: most believed that knowing the dialect would allow them to communicate with a greater number of people, especially with the elderly. Instrumental benefits of speaking the dialect included professional reasons, travel and work in German-speaking countries, and greater facility for learning High German. For the group of favorable or mixed essays, sentimental reasons were mentioned least often. Some of the mixed essays saw definite or potential problems in dialect use: the lack of linguistic unity was viewed as potentially divisive for a country. Other essays mentioned the feeling of being excluded when the dialect was spoken in their presence. And many essays argued that dialect-speaking children experience difficulties in the mastery of 'good French,' and mentioned the danger of having an Alsatian

< previous page

page_169

next page >

< previous page

page_170

next page > Page 170

accent while speaking French. The latter 'problem' is no trivial matter, since an Alsatian accent when pronouncing French usually produces very negative judgments of the speaker: 'an accent' is considered unrefined, ungraceful, crude, ridiculous, a mark of lower-class origins and a lack of education. Marthe Philipp, a specialist on the phonology of Alsatian and French in Alsace, goes as far as claiming that 'à la limite un clochard parisien est considéré comme quelqu'un de plus distingué que l'universitaire alsacien qui parle avec l'accent' (Philipp, 1985: 22). 5 For the entirely unfavorable essays, negative feelings and emotions seemed to stand out: although reasons for disliking the dialect covered communicative dimensions (the students could not understand), value reasons (the dialect is not a real language, it is 'ugly' and 'deformed,' and regional languages have no value), or instrumental reasons (the dialect is not useful), it appears that the principal grievance against the dialect and dialect speakers is that students felt excluded and resentful when people spoke the dialect in their presence. They resented 'feeling like foreigners' in their own country, and many did not like the fact that Alsatian is a dialect of German, a 'foreign language.' All these reasons provoked strong negative feelings and emotions which caused them to reject the dialect. In those essays there was no appreciation of the history and separate culture of the area. In summary, favorable attitudes about the dialect focus on its worth as a major element in the Alsatian cultural patrimony. It is seen as useful for communicative and instrumental reasons. Sentimental reasons, such as the beauty of Alsatian or personal satisfaction in speaking it, were hardly ever mentioned. The dialect speakers par excellence appear as the elderly rural speakers, and there is tolerance towards that group since it is understood that this is their first language. But tolerance is not as great towards younger dialect speakers: if they use the dialect, or if they have an accent when speaking French, they run the risk of being called 'peasants' or 'plouks', derrogatory terms with connotations of backwardness and ignorance. Yet, there is also one level at which Alsatian functions as a language of solidarity, as a secret language, and even as a language of ' manhood.' In spite of considerable goodwill towards the dialect, including among non-dialect speakers, there does not seem to be a clear relationship between favorable attitudes and greater Alsatian use, since the language use survey clearly points to a shift towards French. The situation in Alsace may be comparable to that of other minority languages, e.g. Irish, in that, although Irish is little spoken, it is still part of Irish identity in a symbolic sense. The

< previous page

page_170

next page >

< previous page

page_171

next page > Page 171

same is true of immigrant groups in the United States, who still consider the language spoken by their ancestors as part of their heritage, even though they may know or use that language little or not at all. As Edwards (1985: 51) noted, 'it is quite possible ... for favorable cultural attitudes to coincide with language shift based upon practical considerations'. Most young respondents seem comfortable with their dual identity as Alsatian and French. They see no conflict or inconsistency in being Alsatians and speaking French in most situations. While quite a few student essays mentioned the value of Alsatian traditions and heritage, symbolic ethnicity might be expressed in ways which do not necessarily include the dialect, such as traditional foods, customs and celebrations. As happens with the fest-noz in Brittany, Alsatians have a vast choice of traditional Alsatian celebrations to attend, such as kilbes, various wine or food festivals, or presentations of folkloric music and dances. These cultural activities derive their appeal precisely from the fact that they do not require any major adjustments in linguistic behavior, while allowing French to remain the desired language of economic and social advancement. Notes 1. Monique Wach (1989) mentions a 1979 study on bilingualism in the Bas-Rhin which concludes that the dialect constitutes a handicap for intellectual performance, particularly in verbal performance, but also in non-verbal performance. 2. See Wolf & Fisher's (1983) study which points out that most non-standard forms in Alsace can also be found in other French regions. 3. In fact several Molière plays have been translated into Alsatian. In 1987, Mr Alfred Willenbucher was working on a translation of the Bourgeois Gentilhomme. 4. Denis & Veltman (1989) included a chapter by Monique Wach in their study, which discussed qualitative data on language attitudes of Alsatian speakers, but my study is the only one I am aware of which looks at the attitudes of nondialect-speaking students. 5. This is not to deny that an Alsatian accent can have covert prestige or can be used to stress solidarity. As noted by Marthe Philipp (1985: 22), some younger Alsatians who are interested in the defense and promotion of the dialect are now declaring that they do not want to lose their accent, because they are proud to be Alsatian. In my experience, most people can control their accent and can use more or less accented French, according to the situation.

< previous page

page_171

next page >

< previous page

page_172

next page > Page 172

Conclusion The situation of the Alsatian dialect in the Mulhouse area today is characterized by factors which have been found in other situations of language shift in France and Europe: (1) The dialect is spoken predominantly by middle-aged or older speakers who not only use the dialect in more situations than the younger generations, but whose proficiency is greater. Dominance in Alsatian is associated with older speakers, whereas dominance in French is characteristic of the young. However, in this study, the adults were found to be already quite Frenchified themselves, especially in the public domain. (2) Related to the point above is the fact that domains in which the dialect used to be strong, such as the family or the neighborhood, are now being encroached upon by French. While young Alsatian speakers still use the dialect with their parents, they don't do so with their siblings or friends. This generational shift reflects the trend towards an everincreasing role of French among the young, even within their family. Since the young are Frenchified in all other domains, it is not likely that two languages will continue to be maintained, when one is sufficient in all contexts. Ladin & Rosenfeld (1979), as well as Philipps (1975, 1978) and the Cercle René Schikele, characterize the situation of Alsace as diglossic, on the grounds that French is the high language of prestige and Alsatian is the low, and that the functions of French and Alsatian are in complementary distribution. They were assessing the linguistic situation in the mid and late 1970s. Most of the current research, including the present study, points to a loss of functional distribution, or at least to its erosion: Alsatian is no longer the only, or even the main, language spoken in the family. Indeed, the family seems to facilitate assimilation to French, as shown by Khettry (1982). (3) Gender is also important, in that women consistently use the High more than men. French is the language of prestige, and refinement, and women may be more sensitive to these characteristics. This preference for

< previous page

page_172

next page >

< previous page

page_173

next page > Page 173

the high varieties has important consequences, since women are traditionally at home, and closely connected with the rearing of children. Women help with homework and confer with teachers, and they know from everyday experience the importance of a good command of French for success in school and for future employment opportunities. Furthermore, most women who work outside their homes do so in the area of services, which is dominated by French. (4) The dialect is still a rural phenomenon. This explains the connotations of provincialism, lack of culture, and backwardness which are often associated with it. Yet, rural areas are not what they used to be. While the most obvious meaning of 'rural' is its opposition to 'urban,' the terms themselves are vague. Many commuters live in villages, but work every day in the nearest city. At night, or on weekends, they may revert to a rural or rural-like existence, as suggested by Tabouret-Keller (1981: 8). On the other hand, the use of French in the city workplace may carry over to home in the village. Furthermore, an urban exodus from Mulhouse has caused a 4.10% population loss between 1975 and 1982. Many who leave the city are young families who buy or build a home in the villages surrounding Mulhouse. These city dwellers may bring more Frenchified linguistic habits with them. It is not clear how these population shifts have affected the linguistic situation, but the impact of these population movements may work against the dialect by weakening it in its traditional stronghold. (5) It appears that a significant number of bilinguals are not passing on the dialect to their children; and those parents who speak Alsatian to their children also code-switch. Fasold (1984: 216) notes, 'almost all cases of societal language shift come about through intergenerational shifting'. The importance of parents passing or not passing on the dialect to their children is demonstrated in the studies of Veltman (1983) and Denis (1985) and Denis & Veltman (1989). In addition, they found evidence that in mixed marriages, where one spouse does not speak the dialect, the dialect is far less likely to be passed on to children than in marriages where both spouses speak the dialect. (6) In spite of overtly favorable attitudes, the 'patois ideology' still exerts a strong influence on the evaluation of the Alsatian dialect. In France, the pervasive concept of patois has perpetuated the cliché of patois or dialects as uncultured language varieties since patois speakers tend to live in the provinces, away from Paris. (7) There is no great concern or interest for language revival among the general population. Groups who actively support the dialect are often

< previous page

page_173

next page >

< previous page

page_174

next page > Page 174

dominated by city dwellers, especially intellectuals, who are successfully assimilated into the majority mainstream population. Rural heartland dialect speakers often perceive that they have little in common with those groups. And many rural Alsatians may be more concerned with modernization, better education, and social mobility than with dialect preservation. Although important differences in the situations minority languages find themselves in may render exact comparisons impossible, political, social, educational and ecomomic factors have been advanced to explain language shift in other parts of Europe. Such factors can also be found in Alsace: the checkered history of FrancoGerman rivalry, the cultural and educational policies of the highly centralized French government, and economic developments have all had an impact on the linguistic situation and on the ethnolinguistic consciousness of Alsatians. After World War II, many Alsatians were afraid of not seeming French enough. Some tried to prove themselves as true Frenchmen, by displaying intense chauvinism, and asserting their allegiance to France. It is clear that, both for some monolingual French speakers and for some Alsatian speakers, the dialect is a salient ethnic marker, one which can signify one's allegiance to the region rather than to the nation. Thus, some monolingual French speakers equate speaking the dialect with a political choice showing a lack of allegiance to France. The long history of centralized governments in France, and their preoccupation with national unity and uniformity, have always defined the 'public good' in relation to the whole nation, rather than to regions. The Revolutionary slogan of 'one nation, one language' has endured. Educational policies have also been singled out and faulted with the decline of regional languages in Olson, Ladin, Philipps, Streicher, Hessini and Neville: the schools are blamed for teaching French only, and for actively discouraging or repressing the regional dialects. As Timm (1980: 30) notes, speaking a regional dialect was viewed 'as a handicap and an obstacle to social advancement, at best, and as a sign of inferiority at worst.' The role of universal military service in France has not been mentioned as often as the schools as a cause of Frenchification. Yet, it certainly plays a role in creating a sense of Frenchness and in bringing out the usefulness and necessity of French as a common language for all French citizens. 1 Industrialization, such as the opening of auto-manufacturing and chemical plants in the Mulhouse area, often in formerly agricultural

< previous page

page_174

next page >

< previous page

page_175

next page > Page 175

villages, has attracted thousands of non-dialect-speaking newcomers, whose presence means that conversations between them and the villagers must be in French. Patterns of foreign immigration, related to industrialization, also may play an important role in situations of language shift. The Mulhouse area has 52% of the foreign population in the Haut-Rhin, and foreigners make up 13% of the total Haut-Rhin population. In some areas in North and West Mulhouse, foreign workers make up 23% of the population. These immigrant workers constitute permanent blocks in the population that normally learn French rather than the dialect. As Timm noted, 'why [should they] replace one 'superfluous' language with another?' (Timm, 1980: 39). Since foreign families tend to have more children than French and Alsatian couples, they will have a significant demographic impact on the area, and will further dilute the ratio of Alsatian speakers in the area. Of the families who have more than three children, 8% are French, while 26% are foreign (INSEE, 1986: 17). One out of eight children born in Alsace is born to a foreign mother. Also important is the fact that 'mixed' marriages where one spouse is foreign were up 14% in Alsace between 1979 and 1983 (see Denis, 1985). Among the reasons for the shift, there has often been a reluctance especially on the part of language promotion groups to admit that bilingual speakers themselves bear a heavy responsibility for language shift, as in the case of parents not passing the dialect to their children. Referring to Alsace, Ladin and Philipps claim that no people willingly gives up its language, and that Alsatians have been forced to abandon their dialect. While this is true at one level, in the sense that a dominant culture or language exerts strong pressures on minorities, yet at another level, a choice is involved in language shift. This is in agreement with Le Page's (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985) theory of acts of identity, and also with Edwards' convincing argument that language shift results from a conscious pragmatic choice. This is not a choice to abandon the dialect, but rather a choice to stress French in the education of children, in order to improve the latter's chances for scholastic success and social advancement. Again, this does not mean that the purpose of bilingual parents is to consciously precipitate the decline of the dialect: Alsatian still has communicative, sentimental and traditional value, but the choice reflects pragmatic concerns. Some recent changes in official and educational policies, with their concomitant psychological changes, have been viewed as factors which might yet alter or slow down the decline of the dialect. So have the efforts of language promotion groups on behalf of the dialect. However,

< previous page

page_175

next page >

< previous page

page_176

next page > Page 176

upon scrutinizing these changes, it becomes clear that their effect may be limited. In recent years, the French government has shown more tolerance for and interest in regional languages. Cynics may point out that, now that regional languages have all but disappeared in France, they are no longer perceived as threats (while English is). This is reflected in school curriculum, which now permits the use of the Alsatian dialect in kindergarten or primary schools (primarily for songs and games), and the teaching of regional languages and cultures in secondary schools. My experience with the option langue et culture régionales is that the dialect is usually not taught, but that students learn about a variety of cultural topics. They may study the architecture of the region, old traditions, or visit museums. This certainly fills a gap in a neglected part of their education. Still, teachers are poorly paid if at all for teaching these courses, and the courses are not compulsory. Thus, only a small minority of students benefit from these changes. Another healthy change is a new awareness that Alsatian/French bilingualism is not a problem in and of itself. Some educators have pointed out that the 'school handicap' of Alsatian is not linguistic but psychological, and comes from the fact that the dialect spoken at home is denigrated and discouraged in school. Attitudes towards the teaching of High German have also changed, and criticism that Hochdeutsch is often taught as a foreign language, and that students do not see the relationship between it and the dialect, is probably no longer so true. In this respect, Ladin had stated that German had become a foreign language for students: Ich glaube dass das Elsässische als Dialekt des Deutschen sicherlich eine grosse strukturale Affinität zu diesem besitzt, dass aber auch angesichts der Ausgeprägtheit des Dialekts das Deutsche, gemessen an der jeweiligen Gebrauchsnorm, fur die Elsässer eine Fremdsprache geworden ist, gleich wie das sogenannte Hochdeutsch der Schweiz für den Deutschschweitzer ja auch angeblich eine Fremdsprache ist (Ladin, 1982: 29) Philipps also contended that history had created a distance between Alsatian and Hochdeutsch, a fact which caused greater psychological distance. This, in turn, reinforced Alsatians' feeling that their language was different from Hochdeutsch. The relationship between Alsatian and Hochdeutsch being no longer perceived, Hochdeutsch was eventually felt to be a foreign language (Philipps, 1978: 61). Philipps goes as far as qualifying Alsatian attitudes towards High German as a mental block.

< previous page

page_176

next page >

< previous page

page_177

next page > Page 177

From my questionnaires and attitudes survey, it seems that this is no longer true, and that many students are aware of the connection between the dialect and High German. Furthermore, some of the High German textbooks currently used in Alsace contain poetry in the dialect, precisely to show students this connection. Some economic trends may actually be helping the dialect: the increasing number of German-owned industries that settle in rural Alsace, and the 35,000 Alsatians who work in Germany and Switzerland daily, may have a stabilizing effect on the dialect, by making the use of Alsatian necessary (Philipps, 1982: 187). The opening of European borders in 1992, and the possibility of working anywhere in Europe, may also make knowledge of the dialect a more valuable skill. Speaking Alsatian is no longer perceived as synonymous with being a bad French citizen: younger Alsatians who did not experience the Nazi occupation, see no conflict between their speaking a Germanic dialect and their French citizenship. (Conversely, they think it natural to be Alsatian and to speak French, predominantly, or exclusively.) Also indicative of recent changes in official circles is the decision by the Communauté Urbaine de Strasbourg to allow its elected officials to speak either French or Alsatian in their deliberations. However, Wach notes that, even if speaking Alsatian is now chic in some social circles, it is not so sure that the masses know or accept these new rules of social taste (Wach, 1989:117). 2 The work of language promotion groups has no doubt been useful in raising the consciousness of some Alsatians. Publications by groups such as the Cercle René Schickele have provided much useful and interesting information about the cultural history of Alsace and about the linguistic situation. And their campaign to encourage students of the sixième to take German as a first foreign language may have succeeded. Still, their success has not been as great as they might wish. Some possible reasons are offered below. As Edwards (1985) has noted, by the time languages are seen to be in need of support, their positions are already seriously compromised. This is probably true in the case of Alsace. Some of the arguments given by language promotion groups in favor of the dialect may raise suspicions or disbelief in the Alsatian population, and their earnest but sometimes mordant criticism of Alsatians may alienate or anger some. The argument proposed by some language activists in favor of a bilingual education in French/German rather than in French/Alsatian is

< previous page

page_177

next page >

< previous page

page_178

next page > Page 178

based on the fact that German gives access to a great language with a broad cultural and literary history, and that the teaching of Alsatian next to French 'has no chance to be taken seriously' (Hessini, 1981: 158). Marc Hug (1975), from the University of Strasbourg, uses similar reasons for promoting the teaching of German rather than Alsatian in schools. These proposals, however, make the claim that French/German bilingualism will promote dialect use. As my investigation has shown, most adults indeed do support the teaching of High German over that of Alsatian. This writer, however, finds it hard to see how learning High German in school would foster a greater use of Alsatian in everyday communication. While the goal of German/French bilingualism is laudable, and should be encouraged in Alsace, the kind of reasoning above may be counter productive, as far as the dialect itself is concerned: it betrays the same type of elitist attitude that is characteristic of the relationship between French and Alsatian. The implication is still that, somehow, Alsatian is not a 'real' language, whereas High German is. If German were to acquire a social function which it does not have at the present time, since Alsatians do not use German to communicate between themselves Alsatian would be in a situation where it was not only the low variety vis-à-vis French, but also vis-à-vis German in Alsatian society. Furthermore the dialect being a spoken variety, supporting High German as 'its written support' just does not really seem to propose significant help with regard to the dialect. The mixed signals given by some prominent language activists (many of whom are teachers of German at the secondary or university level), may unintentionally hurt the cause of Alsatian without really helping the supporters of a French/High German bilingual education. For example, Philipps calls the relationship between French and Alsatian a 'bastard form' of bilingualism, on the grounds that Alsatian is 'only a dialect, an incomplete language' (Philipps, 1982: 187). Charles Stauffer (1979) criticizes the 'bad' Alsatian spoken by most young Alsatians. And Weckman, a wellknown Alsatian writer, qualifies these young Alsatians' dialect as 'borborygmes alsacos,' (pseudo-Alsatian gobbledygook) (Ladin, 1982: 94). Thus, the very people involved in language maintenance groups, who defend the rights of the dialect vis-à-vis French authorities, also denigrate and reprove those who do use the dialect. These mixed signals only add to the confusion of Alsatians in an already complex situation, and are a clear example of the variability of standards of evaluation and attitudes in intra-versus inter-group contexts. Edwards notes that, often, language promotion groups, while meaning well, adopt a slightly patronizing attitude 'in their attempts to preserve

< previous page

page_178

next page >

< previous page

page_179

next page > Page 179

people as they are, on the grounds that they are really better off if only they knew it, that progress is not all it is made out to be, etc' (Edwards, 1985: 95). This type of attitude is discernible in Philipps, a prominent dialect advocate, in his criticism of parents who do not pass on the dialect to their children. He denounces Alsatian parents for being 'mindless, indifferent, and ignorant of the real nature of the linguistic problem in Alsace' (Philipps, 1982: 225), i.e. for not knowing what they are doing. He also chastises parents for the economic and materialistic concerns which make them use French with their children (Philipps, 1978: 162). As distasteful as the pragmatic reasons for shift may seem to dialect promotion groups, recognizing these reasons might lead to a different and more efficient tack, since appeals to speak the dialect along the lines of Alsatian identity and traditions have not met with much success. In conclusion, changes of verbal behavior in Alsace have gone hand in hand with changes in value and group identification. Clearly, the history of Alsace and the nature of the language contact situation have profoundly affected values and motivation to speak Alsatian or not and therefore the functions of the dialect. Since 1945, Alsatians have gone through a period of rapid transition where political, social, and economic factors have broken down traditional intergroup barriers, thus bringing about a change of norms. It has been the contention of this study that language shift in Alsace cannot be understood without an appreciation for the processes of societal change which have led to contemporary conditions. In a sense, Le Page's 'acts of identity' (Le Page & Tabouret-Keller, 1985) hypothesis works in the Alsatian situation: Alsatians in general have lost part of their Germanic identity, in favor of a decidedly French identity. But ethnicity is not characterized by language-oriented criteria only. Harald Haarmann (1986) identifies also paternity and distinctive cultural patterns. And if the communicative aspect of the dialect has lost its importance, its symbolic value and the value of Alsatian traditions seem to be intact, or perhaps even enhanced. This is why some Alsatians can still feel Alsatian even though the language has been lost. In the final analysis, ethnicity is a complex blend and interaction of self-identification, based on personal choice, and categorization by others. Edwards' (1985) point is that some groups have been willing to make alterations in their lives when they have perceived these changes to be in their best interest. In Alsace, as in other French provinces, French came to be seen not only as the language of cultural prestige, but also as the language of greatest practicality and efficiency within the French nation,

< previous page

page_179

next page >

< previous page

page_180

next page > Page 180

as well as the language of progress, modern technology, employment and prosperity. Reducing language shift to essentially economic or socio-economic causes is not a popular view. Fishman has decried 'economic reduc-tionism.' Still, undeniably, Edwards' (1985) contention that pragmatic economic factors play a major role in language shift contains some truth. This is why, once a group has shifted, it may be very difficult to induce it to shift again on cultural grounds alone. The foregoing comments have dealt with the primarily 'macro' aspects of language shift in Alsace. This study also took a look at a more 'micro' level of language use. The analysis of in situ conversations in this study shows that while language choice cannot be predicted for each situation, still it is not random, and it is used to achieve certain semantic goals. While the dialect is more appropriate in certain situations, the choice of code is unpredictable, and can be interpreted only after the choice has occurred. 3 More face-to-face observation of language use and attitudinal studies will show additional ways in which the choice of code reflects the speaker's perception of the situation and his attitudes towards groups and languages. It will show language change as expressively and symbolically used linguistic variation. Susan Gal characterizes the process of language change as the outcome of differences between speakers, which result in new forms eventually replacing older forms which can first be located as synchronic variants in the speech of emically demarcated subgroups within the community. The redistribution of such synchronic variants to new linguistic contexts to different social contexts, and to new sets of speakers ... result in linguistic change over time. (Gal, 1979: 5-6) In a language shift situation like the one in Alsace, notions of group boundaries and ethnic identity as well as standards of evaluation vary with context. The preceding discussion has important implications for the future of the Alsatian dialect, and offers few grounds for optimism. Despite a more tolerant and more benign attitude of French authorities towards a pluralistic society, despite the activities of the language maintenance groups, and despite generally favorable overt attitudes towards the dialect, the regression of the dialect described in earlier studies has continued. An altered sense of identity is undeniable, since, for many young Alsatians, the dialect is no longer a necessary component of their Alsatian identity

< previous page

page_180

next page >

< previous page

page_181

next page > Page 181

and since they do not question their national identity. Their Frenchness seems more 'natural' to them than to their parents or grandparents. It seems unlikely that the majority of the young respondents, who now use the dialect mostly with the older generations, will start using it again with their cohorts, or their own children. 4 Projected demographic changes, and changes in the composition of families (Alsatian, mixed, French and foreign), and the patterns of language use in each of them, make the outlook for the dialect very grim. In fact, some researchers feel that it may disappear much faster than projected by earlier studies (Denis & Veltman, 1989). Gerard Leser, a teacher at the Université Populaire du Rhin may be all too correct when he writes: 'I think we [Alsatians] must get used to and accept the fact that there are, and there will be more and more, Alsatian men and women who will feel just as Alsatian as we do, but whose language will be only French' (quoted in Denis & Veltman, 1989: 97). The current youngest generation - the student respondents in this study, who do not seem aware of this fact t will play a crucial role in determining the future of Alsatian and Alsatianness. Notes 1. An article in The Economist (15-25 August 1989: 36) points out that '60% of today's Alsatians cannot remember any but French teachers, drill sergeants, and bosses'. 2. As is explained in Wach's (1989) article, speaking Alsatian at an official function is for the moment a luxury which some speakers can offer themselves - as long as they could not be suspected of using the dialect for lack of knowledge or ability in French; this coup de force is not within the reach of any rural Alsatian ... the use of Alsatian in these circumstances is bound to a surplus in the linguistic capital, French being the language common to all, and the dialect being the additional linguistic capital, the hierarchy is thus inverted (Wach, 1989: 117). 3. For instance, a conversation between Hessini and some university students in Strasbourg took place entirely in Alsatian, which was in itself very unusual, since political, educational or abstract matters are usually discussed in French. In this sense, the use of Alsatian was marked and conveyed a desire to broaden the scope of use of the dialect (Hessini, 1981:155 f.). 4. In some situations, such as in Northern Belgium, it was discovered that the movement away from the mother-tongue, which often took place in young people at puberty, was often compensated for in later years. This kind of phenomenon would have to become very common in Alsace, in order to reverse the decline of the dialect.

< previous page

page_181

next page >

< previous page

page_182

next page > Page 182

Appendix A: Sample of Student Questionnaire Le questionnaire suivant a été préparé en vue de déterminer à des fins statistiques et linguistiques les situations dans lesquelles les dialectophones parlent alsacien, français, allemand ou plusieurs de ces langues à la fois. En y répondant, tu apportes une collaboration à mon étude. Il n'y a pus de bonnes ou de mauvaises réponses. Il s'agit d'une recherche générale et ce qui sont ton expérience et ton point de vue personnels qui m'intéressent. L'absence de toute mention de ton nom garantit l'anonymat. Si toutefois tu t' intéresses aux resultats de cette enquète, je me ferai un plaisir de te les communiquer. Aces fins, note ton nom et ton adresse sur le questionnaire. Si tu le désires, utilise le verso des feuilles du questionnaire pour tes commentaires éventuels. Je te remercie d'avance de bien vouloir prendre le temps de remplir le questionnaire et de la part que tu prendras à la progression de mes recherches. Liliane Vassberg 1.Age: 2.Sexe (Encercler la réponse) 1. Féminin 2. Masculin 3.Lieu de naissance (prière de préciser la ville, le département et le pays s'il y lieu) 4.Lieu de naissance des parents 1. Lieu de naissance du père 2. Lieu de naissance de la mère 5.Profession des parents 1. Profession du père 2. Profession de la mère 6.Premiere langue parlée (celle apprise à la maison) 1. Alsacien

< previous page

page_182

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_183

Page 183 2. 3. 4.

Français Allemand Autre (Prière de préciser) ___________________________ 7. Premiere langue apprise à l'école 1. Français 2. Allemand 3. Autre (Préciser) 8. Premiere langue étrangère 1. allemand 2. anglais 3. autre (Préciser): 9. Lieu du domicile actuel (ville) 10.Ta ville ou ton village a une population de 1. Moins de 5.000 habitants 2. 5.000 à 9999 3. 10.000 à 19.999 4. 20.000 à 49.999 5. 50.000 à 99.999 6. 100.000 à 199.999 7. 200.000 à 499.999 8. Plus de 500.000 11.En quelle classe estu? 12.Quelle phrase te décrit le mieux? 1. Je parle mieux l'alsacien que le français 2. Je parle mieux le français que l'alsacien 3. Je parle aussi bien le français et l'Alsacien 4. Je ne parle que le français 5. Je ne parle que l'alsacien 6. Autres langues parlées: EMPLOI DES LANGUES Les questions suivantes concernent l'emploi des langues. Utilise les chiffres suivants pour signifier ta réponse. Choisis la réponse qui décrit le mieux tes habitudes. 1 = J'emploie uniquement l'Alsacien 2 = J'emploie plutôt (généralement) l'Alsacien 3 = J'emploie le français et l'Alsacien (moitié moitié) 4 = J'emploie plutôt (généralement) le français 5 = J'emploie uniquement le français 6 = Cette situation ne se présente pas pour moi 13. Quelles langue(s) utilises-tu dans les situations suivantes: 1. à la maison avec ton père 2. à la maison avec ta mère 3. à la maison avec tes frères et soeurs plus jeunes que toi 4. à la maison avec tes frères et soeurs plus agés que toi

< previous page

page_183

1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_184

Page 184 5. à la maison avec tes grands parents 6. à la maison avec tes amis 14.1. dans la rue avec tes voisins 2. dans la rue avec un(e) inconnu 3. dans la rue avec un agent de police 4. dans la rue avec un(e) enfant) 5. dans la rue avec une personne agée 15.1. dans un grand magasin avec les vendeurs 2. dans un petit commerce avec le patron ou le vendeur 3. Chez le boulanger ou l'épicier du quartier 4. au marché avec les vendeurs 5. dans un grand magazin avec des amis alsaciens 6. au marché avec des amis alsaciens 16.1. à l'école avec tes copains 2. à l'école avec les maîtres ou les professeurs 17.1. dans un bureau de poste 2. dans des bureaux administratifs 3. dans un autobus ou un train avec tes copains alsaciens 18.1. dans un café ou restaurant avec des amis 2. dans un café ou restaurant avec le garçon 19. Quelles langue(s) utilises-tu pour parler des sujets suivants avec des dialectophones 1. de la famille 2. des sports 3. de la politique 4. de la religion 5. des sciences 6. des problèmes de la société 7. de films 8. de programmes à la télé 20. Quelle langue utilises-tu dans les buts suivants 1. Pour raconter une anecdote 2. Pour être sérieux 3. Pour encourager quelqu'un 4. Pour consoler 5. Pour te plaindre de quelque chose a. avec ta famille ou tes amis b. dans un bureau, ou un magasin 6. Quand tu es en colère a. avec ta famille ou tes amis b. avec des personnes que tu connais mal 7. Pour flatter 8. Pour chanter (à l'occasion d'une fête familiale par exemple) 21. En quelle langue réfléchis-tu à des problèmes abstraits?

< previous page

page_184

1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6 1234 5 6

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_185

Page 185 22.En quelle langue calcules-tu de tête? 23.En quelle langue penses-tu quand tu t'adonnes à une activité physique ou pratique (sports, jeux, achats, etc.) 24.Dans quelle langue ton père s'entretient-il généralement avec toi? 25.Dans quelle langue ta mère s'entretient-elle généralement avec toi? 26.Dans quelle langue s'entretiennent généralement tes parents entre eux?

123456 123456 123456 123456 123456

LES MEDIAS (radio, té1évision, presse) Encercle la réponse quite semble décrire tes habitudes le mieux. 27.1.Je regarde surtout les programmes de télé français. 2.Je regarde surtout les programmes allemands. 3.Je regarde à peu près la même proportion de programmes allemands et français. 4.Je ne regarde pas la télé. 28.Si tu regardes quelquefois la télé allemande, les programmes que tu regarde sont surtout des programmes de 1.sports 2.actualités 3.variétés 5.films policiers 6.théàtre 7.films documentaires. 29.1.Je n'écoute que des stations de radio françaises. 2.Je n'écoute que des programmes de radio en allemand. 3.J'écoute des programmes en français et en allemand. 4.Je n'écoute pas la radio 30.Pour les programmes de télévision et de radio, j'attache la plus grande importance à: 1.la qualité des programmes 2.la langue 3.la curiosité culturelle. 31.1.Je ne lis que des journaux et magazines en français. 2.Si j'ai un journal bilingue en main, je lis uniquement les articles en français. 3.Je lis régulièrement un journal ou un magazine imprimé en allemand. 4.Je lis les articles en dialecte dans les éditionsfrançaises des journaux quand il yen a. AUTRES SITUATIONS 32. Si tu vas à un office religieux, choisiras-tu l'office 1. en français 2. en allemand

< previous page

page_185

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_186

Page 186 33. Si tu vas en Allemagne ou en Suisse, parles-tu 1. l'alsacien 2. le français 3. l'allemand Dans la section suivante indique ta réponse en encerclant la chiffre qui correspond le mieux à opinion 1 = Je suis tout à fait d'accord 2 = Je suis plutôt d'accord 3 = Je suis indécis(e) 4 = Je ne suis pas tellement d'accord 5 = Je ne suis pas d'accord 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

L'alsacien fait partie du patrimoine culturel J'utilise l'alsacien aussi souvent que possible Les jeunes parlent de moins en moins l'alsacien La connaissance de l'alsacien ne nuit pas a celle du français L'alsacien exprime mieux mes sentiments L'alsacien est plutôt utilisé à la campagne Les jeunes parlent mal l'alsacien C'est aux écoles qu'il revient d'enseigner l'alsacien La connaissance de l'alsacien en Alsace permet d'obtenir un meilleur emploi 10.L'alsacien est utile en dehors de l'Alsace 11.L' allemand est plus correct que l'alsacien 12.L'alsacien peut exprimer tout ce qu' exprime le français ou l'allemand 13.Ce sont les parents qui devraient enseigner l'alsacien à leurs enfants 14.La connaissance du français est plus utile que celle de l'alsacien. 15.Je me sens d'abord Alsacien, ensuite Français 16.l'Alsacien devrait être obligatoire à l'école 17.L'alsacien est un dialecte allemand au même titre que le dialecte de Bade ou du Rheinland 18.L'apprentissage de l'allemand est utile pour mieux parler l'alsacien 19.Si les enfants apprennent l'allemand a l'école dès le bas age, ils utiliseront l'alsacien plus souvent en dehors de l'école 20.Plus on est éduqué, moins on parle alsacien 21.La connaissance de l'allemand renforce la connaissance du dialecte

< previous page

page_186

12345 12345 I 2345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_187

Page 187 22. 23. 24. 25.

On peut se sentir Alsacien sans parler le dialecte L'allemand, plutôt que l'alsacien devrait être enseigné en Alsace. Le français est la langue des sentiments Le français est la langue de l'humour

< previous page

page_187

12345 12345 12345 12345

next page >

< previous page

page_188

next page > Page 188

Appendix B: Sample of Adult Questionnaire Le questionnaire suivant a été préparé en rue de déterminer à des fins statistiques et linguistiques les situations dans lesquelles les dialectophones parlent alsacien, français, allemand ou plusieurs de ces langues à la fois. En y répondant, vous apportez une collaboration à mon étude. Il n'y a pas de bonnes ou de mauvaises réponses. Il s'agit d'une recherche générale et ce sont votre expérience et votre point de vue personnels qui m'intéresent. L'absence de toute mention de votre nom garantit l'anonymat. Si toutefois vous vous intéressez aux résultats de cette enquête, je me ferai un plaisir de vous les communiquer. Aces fins, notez votre nom et votre adresse sur le questionnaire. Si vous le désirez, utilisez le verso des feuilles du questionnaire pour vos commentaires éventuels. Je vous remercie d'avance de bien vouloir prendre le temps de remplir le questionnaire et de la part que vous prendrez à la progression de mes recherches. Liliane Vassberg 1.

2. 3.

4.

Age (Encercler la réponse) 1. Moins de 18 ans 2. 18-25 ans 3. 26-35 ans 4. 36-45 ans 5. 46-55 ans 6. 56-65 ans 7. 66-75 ans 8. Plus de 75 ans Sexe 1. Féminin 2. Masculin Etat civil 1. marié(e) 3. célibataire 4. autre (prière de préciser) Nombre d'enfants

< previous page

page_188

next page >

< previous page

page_189

next page > Page 189

1. pas d'enfants 2. de un à deux enfants 3. de trois à quatre 4. plus de quatre 5. Age des enfants 1. moins de quinze ans 2. de quinze à vingt cinq ans 3. de vingt cinq à trente cinq ans 4. de trente cinq à quarante cinq ans 5. plus de quarante cinq ans 6. Votre lieu de naissance (prière de préciser la ville, le département et le pays, s'il y a lieu) 7. Lieu de naissance de vos parents 1. Lieu de naissance de votre père 2. Lieu de naissance de votre mère 8. Profession de vos parents 1. Profession de votre père 2. Profession de votre mère 9. Première langue parlée (celle apprise à la maison) 1. Alsacien 2. Français 3. Allemand 4. Autre (Prière de préciser) 10.Première langue apprise à l'école 1. Français 2. Allemand 3. Autre (Préciser) 11.Lieu de résidence actuel (ville ou village) 12.Votre ville ou village a une population de 1. Moins de 5.000 habitants 2. 5.000 à 9999 3. 10.000 à 19.999 4. 20.000 à 49.999 5. 50.000 à 99.999 6. 100.000 à 199.999 7. 200.000 à 499.999 8. Plus de 500.000 13.Profession 1. Agriculteur 2. Cadre 3. Commercant 4. Employé(e) de bureau 5. Employé(e) de commerce 14.Profession (continuation) 1. Ouvrier 2. Personnel de services (femmes de ménage, gens de maison)

< previous page

page_189

next page >

< previous page

page_190

next page > Page 190

3. Profession libérale 4.Salarié agricole 5.sans profession 6.Autre (prière de préciser) _________________________ 15.Lieu de travail; vous travaillez 1.pour une petite entreprise 2.pour une moyenne entreprise 3.pour une grande entreprise 4.pour un particulier 5.Autre: 16.Lieu de travail(continuation). Vous travaillez dans une ville ou un village de 1.moins de cinq mille habitants 2.de 5000 à 9999 3.de 10.000 à 19.999 4.20.000 à 49.999 5.50.000 à 99.999 6.100.000 à 199.999 7.200.000 à 499.999 8.Plus de 500.000 17.Scolarité (Quel niveau d'études avez vous complété?) 1.primaire 2.secondaire 3.études techniques 4.études universitaires 18.Quelle phrase vous décrit le mieux? 1.Je parle mieux l'alsacien que le français 2.Je parle mieux le français que l'alsacien 3.Je parle aussi bien le français et l'Alsacien 4.Je ne parle que le français 5.Je ne parle que l'alsacien 6.Autres langues parlées: EMPLOI DES LANGUES Les questions suivantes concernent l'emploi des langues. Utilisez les chiffres suivants pour signifier votre réponse. Choisissez la réponse qui décrit le mieux vos habitudes. 1 = J'emploie uniquement l'alsacien 2 = J'emploie plutôt (généralement) l'Alsacien 3 = J'emploie le français et l'Alsacien (moitié moitié) 4 = J'emploie plutôt (généralement) le Français 5 = J'emploie uniquement le français 6 = Cette situation ne se présente pas pour moi Exemple De RéPonse Si vous parlez toujours le français avec vos enfants, encerclez le 5 Si vous parlez plutôt l'alsacien avec vos enfants, encerclez le 2

< previous page

page_190

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_191

Page 191 Si vous êtes sans enfants et la situation ne se présente pas pour vous, encerclez le 6, etc. 19. En général quelle langue(s) parlez-vous dans les situations suivantes: 1.à la maison entre époux (ou avec votre compagne ou compagnon) 2.à la maison avec vos parents (ou avec les personnes qui vous ont éléve(e) 3.à la maison avec vos grands parents 4.à la maison avec vos enfants 5.à la maison avec des amisals aciens 20.1.dans la rue avec vos voisins 2.dans la rue avec un(e) inconnu(e) 3.dans la rue avec un agent depolice 4.dans la rue avec un(e) enfant 5.dans la rue avec une personne agée 21.1.dans un grand magasin avec les vendeurs 2.dans un petit commerce avec le patron ou le vendeur 3.au marché avec les vendeurs 4.dans un grand magazin avec des amis alsaciens 5.au marché avec des amis alsaciens 22.1.au travail avec vos collègues 2.au travail avec le(s) chef(s) 3.au travail avec des clients 4.au travail avec votre employé 23.1.dans un bureau de poste 2.dans des bureaux administratifs 3.à la banque 4.dans la rue avec un agent de police 24.1.dans un café ou restaurant avec des amis 2.dans un café ou restaurant avec le garçon 25.Quelles langue(s) utilisez vous pour parler des sujets suivants avec des dialectophones 1.de la famille 2.des sports 3.de la politique 4.de la religion 5.des sciences 6.des problèmes de la société 7.de films 8.de programmes a la télé 26.Quelle langue utilisez-vous dans les buts suivants 1.Pour raconter une anecdote

< previous page

page_191

123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_192

Page 192 2. Pour être sérieux 3. Pour encourager quelqu'un 4. Pour consoler 5. Pour vous plaindre de quelque chose a. avec votre famille ou amis b. dans un bureau, ou un magasin 27.Quelle langue utilisez-vous dans les buts suivants (continuation) 1. Quand vous êtes en colàre a. avec votre famille ou amis b. avec des employés ou des personnes que vous connaissez mal 2. Pour flatter 3. Pour chanter (à une fête de famille par exemple)

123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456 123456

LES MEDIAS (radio, télévision, presse) Encerclez Ia réponse qui vous semble décrire vos habitudes 28.1.Je regarde surtout les programmes de télé français 2.Je regarde surtout les programmes allemands 3.Je regarde à peu prés la même proportion de programmes allemands et français. 4.Je ne regarde pas la télé 29.Si vous regardez quelquefois la tele allemande, les programmes que vous regardez sont surtout des programmes de 1.sports 2.actualités 3.variétés 5.films 6.théâtre 7.films documentaires 30.1.Je n'écoute que des stations de radio françaises. 2.Je n'écoute que des programmes de radio en allemand. 3.J'écoute des programmes en français et en allemand. 4.Je n'écoute pas la radio 31.Pour les programmes de té1évision et de radio, j'attache la plus grande importance a: 1.la qualité des programmes 2.la langue 3.la curiosité culturelie. 32.1.Je ne lis que des journaux et magazines en français. 2.Si j'ai un journal bilingue en main, je lis uniquement les articles en français 3.Je lis régulièrement un journal ou un magazine imprime en allemand. 4.Je lis les articles en dialecte dans les éditions françaises des journaux quand il yen a. AUTRES SITUATIONS 33.Si vous allez à un office religieux, choisirez

< previous page

page_192

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_193

Page 193 vous l'office 1. en français 2. en allemand 34.Si un touriste allemand vous demande des renseignements vous lui répondez en 1. en alsacien 2. en allemand 3. en français 35.Si vous allez en Allemagne ou en Suisse, parlez-vous 1. l'alsacien 2. le français 3. l'allemand 36.Si vous rencontrez un Alsacien en Allemagne, lui parlez-vous 1. en français 2. en alsacien 37.Si vous vous trouvez dans une autre localité où le parler local est nettement différent du vôtre, adresserez-vous la parole à un habitant de cette localité 1. en français 2. en alsacien Dans la section suivante indiquez votre reponse en encerclant la chiffre qui correspond le mieux à votre opinion 1 = Je suis tout à fait d'accord 2 = Je suis plutôt d'accord 3 = Je suis índecis(e) 4 = Je ne suis pas tellement d'accord 5 = Je ne suis pas d'accord du tout 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9.

L'alsacien fait partie du patrimoine culturel J'utilise l'alsacien aussi souvent que possible Les jeunes parlent de moins en moins l'alsacien La connaissance de l'alsacien ne nuit à celle du français L'alsacien exprime mieux mes sentiments L'alsacien est plutôt utilisé à la campagne Les jeunes parlent mal l'alsacien C'est aux écoles qu'il revient d'enseigner l'alsacien La connaissance de l'alsacien en Alsace permet d'obtenir un meilleur emploi 10.L'alsacien est utile en dehors de l'Alsace 11.L' allemand est plus correct quel'alsacien 12.L'alsacien peut exprimer tout ce qu' exprime le français ou l'allemand 13.Ce sont les parents qui devraient enseigner l'alsacien à leurs enfants

< previous page

page_193

12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

next page >

< previous page

next page >

page_194

Page 194 14.La connaissance du français est plus utile que celle de l'alsacien 15.Je me sens d'abord Alsacien, ensuite Français 16.l'Alsacien devrait être obligatoire à l'école 17.L'alsacien est un dialecte allemand au même titre que le dialecte de Bade ou du Rheinland 18.L'apprentissage de l'allemand est utile pour mieux parler l'alsacien 19.Si les enfants apprennent l'allemand à l'école dès le bas age, ils utiliseront l'alsacien plus souvent en dehors de l'école 20.Plus on est éduqué, moins on parle alsacien 21.La connaissance de l'allemand renforce la connaissance du dialecte 22.On peut se sentir Alsacien sans parler le dialecte 23.L'allemand, plutôt que l'alsacien devrait être enseigné en Alsace.

< previous page

page_194

12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345 12345

next page >

< previous page

page_195

next page > Page 195

Bibliography of Works Cited and Consulted Alémanique. Encyclopédie de/'Alsace 1982, Vol. 1. Strasbourg: Editions Publitotal, p. 108. ALLARDT, ERIK 1984, What constitutes a language minority? Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 3 and 4, 195-205. AMASTAE, JON 1978, Sociolinguistic background of PAU students. Swallow VII: Proceedings of the Seventh Southwest Areal Language and Linguistics Workshop. Boulder: University of Colorado. ARNOLD, PAUL 1979, Histoire Secrète de l'Alsace. Paris: Editions Albin michel. AUER, J.C P. 1984, Bilingual Conversation. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. AUSTIN, J.L. 1962, How To Do Things with Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. BAUGH, JOHN and SHERZER, JOEL, (eds) 1984, Language in Use: Readings in Sociolinguistics. Englewood Cliffs, N J: Prentice-Hall. BAKER, O.R. 1980, Categories of code-switching in Hispanic communities: Untangling the terminology. M.A. Thesis. Univ. of Texas at Austin. BEEBE, LESLIE M. 1981, Social and situational factors affecting the communicative strategy of dialect codeswitching. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 32, 139-49. BEER, WILLIAM R. 1980, The Unexpected Rebellion: Ethnic Activism in Contemporary France. New York: New York Univ. Press. BEYER, ERNEST 1964, La palatalisation vocalique spontanée de l'alsacien et du badois. Strasbourg: Publications de la Société Savante d'Alsace et des Régions de l'Est. BEYER, ERNEST and MATZEN, RAYMOND (eds) 1969, Atlas linguistique et ethnographique de l'Alsace, Vol. 1. Paris: Editions du Centre de la Recherche Scientifique. BENTAHILA, ABDELÂLI 1983, Language Attitudes Among Arabic-French Bilinguals in Morocco. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. BERNARDO, D.J. 1975, Appareil éducatif et langue autochtone: le cas du Catalan. Langue Française 25, 37-61. BLOM, J.P., and GUMPERZ, JOHN 1972, Social meaning in linguistic structure: Code-switching in Norway. In J. GUMPERZ and D. HYMES (eds) Directions in Sociolinguistics (pp. 407-34). New York: Holt, Rhinehart, and Winston. BOTHOREL-WITZ, ARLETTE, PHILIPP, MARTHE and SPINDLER, SYLVIANE (eds) 1984, Atlas linguistique et ethnographique de l'Alsace, Vol. 2. Paris: Editions du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. BOULOT, SERGE and BOIZON-FRADET, DANIÈLE 1987, France. Pays multilingue tome 1 (pp. 163-88). Paris: Editions Harmattan.

< previous page

page_195

next page >

< previous page

page_196

next page > Page 196

BRATT PAULSTON, C. 1984, Pronouns of address in Swedish: Social class semantics and a changing system. In JOHN BAUGH and JOEL SHERZER (eds) Language in Use: Readings in Soclolinguistics (pp. 268-91). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. BREITBORDE, L.B. 1983a, Levels of analysis in sociolinguistic explanation: Bilingual code-switching, social relations, and domain theory. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 39, 5-43. 1983b, Rebuttal essay. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 39, 161-77. CLYNE, MICHAEL 1984, Language and Society in the German-speaking Countries. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. COLE, ROGER L. 1975, Divergent and convergent attitudes towards the Alsatian dialect. Anthropological Linguistics 17, 6, 293-304. CRAIG, JOHN E. 1984, Scholarship and Nation Building: The University of Strasbourg and Alsatian Society: 18701939. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. DENIS, MAREIE-NOËLE 1985, Usage de l'alsacien en milieu urbain: évolution et perspectives. Revue d'Alsace 111, 149-56. DENIS, M.N. and VELTMAN, CALVIN 1989, Le déclin du dialecte alsacien. Strasbourg: Association des publications pros les Universités de Strasbourg. DE VRIES, JOHN 1984, Factors affecting the survival of linguistic minorities: A preliminary comparative analysis of data for Western Europe. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 5, 3 and 4, 207-16. DEYON, PIERRE 1986, Le programme 'Langue et culture régionales' en Alsace: bilan et perspectives. Juin 1982-Juin 1985. Revue d'Alsace 112, 363-71. Dialecte Alsacien. Encyclopédie de l'Alsace 1985 Vol. 4. Strasbourg: Editions Publitotal, pp. 2329-2345. DRESSLER, WOLFGANG and WODAK-LEODOLTER, RUTH 1977, Language preservation and language death in Brittany. Linguistics 191, 33-44. DTV-Atlas zur Deutschen Sprache 1985, Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag. EDWARDS, JOHN 1985, Language, Society, and Identity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Encyclopédie de l'Alsace. 12 vol. Strabourg: Editions Publitotal. FANTAPIE, ALAIN 1979, La langue française: pourquoi change-t-elle? In JOSEPH LABAT et al (eds) La France en mutation depuis 1955 pp. 209-18. Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers. FASOLD, RALPH 1984, The Sociolinguistics of Society. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. FISCHER, ANNE 1979 Le code-switching à Strasbourg. Mémoire de Maîtrise. Université Louis Pasteur, section de psychologie, Strasbourg. FISHMAN, JOSHUA 1970, Sociolinguistics: A Brief Introduction. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House. 1972, Language and Nationalism: Two Integratire Essays. Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House Publishers. GAL, SUSAN 1979, Language Shift: Social Determinants of Linguistic Change in Bilingual Austria. New York: Academic Press. 1983, Comment. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 39, 63- 72. GARDNER-CHLOROS, P. 1985, Le code-switching à Strasbourg. Le Français en Alsace (pp. 51 - 60). Paris-Genève: Slatkine. GUMPERZ, JOHN 1970, Verbal strategies in multilingual communication. In J.E. ALATIS and J.J. STACZEK (eds) Perspectives on Bilingualism and Bilingual Education (pp. 293-307). Georgetown: Georgetown University Press. 1977, Social network and language shift. In MOLONY, ZOBL and STÖLING (eds)

< previous page

page_196

next page >

< previous page

page_197

next page > Page 197

Deutsch im Kontakt mit anderen Sprachen/ German in Contact with Other Languages (pp.83-103). Kronberg/Ts: Scriptor Verlag. 1978, Dialectal Conversational Inference in Urban Communication. Language in Society 7, 393-409. 1982a, Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. (ed.) 1982b, Language and Social Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. GORTER, DURK 1987, Aspects of language choice in the Frisian-Dutch bilingual context: Neutrality and assimetry. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 8, 1 and 2, 121-32. GROSJEAN, FRANÇOIS 1982, Life with Two Languages: An Introduction to Bilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. HAARMANN, HARALD 1986, Language in Ethnicity: A View of Basic Ecological Relations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. HARTWEG, F. 1985, Les églises et le français en Alsace de 1850 à 1918. Le Français en Alsace (pp. 31-75). ParisGenève: Champion-Slatkine. 1986, Dialektliteratur und lexikalische Entwicklungstendenzen: zwei Untersuchungen zum Elsässischen. Mehrsprachigkeit in Europa und Kanada Perpektiven der Forschung (pp. 46-53). Bonn: Dümmler. 1988, L'allemand en Alsace de 1918 à 1940. L 'Allemand en Alsace (pp. 31 - 75). Strasbourg: Imprimerie intégrée de l'Université de Strasbourg. HELLER, MONICA 1988, Code-Switching: Anthropological and Sociological Perspectives. Contributions to the Sociology of Language, 48. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. HERRMANN, A. 1872, Die Deutsche Sprache im Elsass. Beilage zum Programm des Kollegiums zu Mülhausen im Elsass für 1872-73. Mulhouse: Imprimerie Veuve Bader et Cie. HESSINI, MARGUERITE 1981, Language use in culture spaces: Alsatian, a case study. Unpublished dissertation, University of Kansas. HEYER, JÜRGEN B. 1975, A Sociolinguistic Investigation of Multilingualism in the Canton of Ticino, Switzerland. The Hague: Mouton. HOFFET, FRÉDÉRIC 1951, Psychanalyse de l'Alsace. Colmar: Editions Alsatia. HOFMAN, J. 1977, Language attitudes in Rhodesia. The Spread of English (pp. 277-301). In J.A. FISHMAN et a/.(eds). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. HUG, MARC 1975, La situation en Alsace. Langue Française 25, 112-20. HYMES, DELL 1976, Foundations in Sociolinguistics: An Ethnographic Approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. INSEE (Institut National de la Statistique et des Etudes Economiques). Direction régionale de Strasbourg: Chiffres pour l'Alsace, 1946, 1962, 1979, 1980, 1986 and 1988. IRJUD, ALPHONSE 1987 La germanisation des noms en Alsace entre 1940 et 1944. Revue d'Alsace 113, fascicule 591, 239-60. JENNY, ALPHONSE, and RICHERT DORIS 1983, Précis de grammaire alsacienne en réféence principalement au parler de Strasbourg. Saisons d'Alsace 83. JUNG, E. 1983, Grammaire de l'alsacien: dialecte de Strasbourg avec indications historiques. Strasbourg: Editions Oberlin. KELLER, R.E. 1961, German Dialects: Phonology and Morphology with Selected Texts. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1978, The German Language. New Jersey: Humanities Press. KETTENACKER, LOTHAR 1978, La politique de Nazification en Alsace. Saisons d'Alsace 65. (Partial translation of the original 1973 German version

< previous page

page_197

next page >

< previous page

page_198

next page > Page 198

Nationalsozialistische Volkstumpolitik im Elsass.) KHETTRY, FRANÇOISE 1982, Comportement linguistique de jeunes Alsaciens. The Canadian Modern Language Review 38, 3, 469-84. KRETZ, PIERRE 1982, Langue et pouvoir judiciaire. Institut Dialectal International: Symposium de Strasbourg, 17-20 Sept, pp. 63-7. LABOV, WILLIAM 1972, Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1, 97-120. LADIN, W. and H. ROSENFEED 1979, Le processus de normalisation linguistique en Alsace. Revue des Sciences Sociales de la France de l'Est 8, 120-57. LADIN, WOLFGANG 1979, Statistiken die nicht lügen. Land un Sproch 4, 8-9. 1982, Der Elsässische Dialekt-Museumsreif? Strasbourg: SALDE. LE MENN, GWENNOLE 1975, Le breton et son enseignement. Langue Française 25, 71-83. LE PAGE, R.B. and TABOURET-KELLER, A. 1985, Acts of Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Land un Sproch/Les Cahiers du Bilinguisme (1979-1989) Strasbourg: Quarterly Publication of the Cercle René Schickele. LEVY, PAUL. 1929, Histoire Linguistique d'Alsace et de Lorraine. Paris: Les Belles Lettres. LIMÓN, JOSE E. 1982, El Meeting: History, Folk Spanish and Ethnic Nationalism in a Chicano Student Community. In JON AMASTAE and LUCÍA ELÍAS-OLIVARES (eds) Spanish inthe United States: Sociolinguistic Aspects (pp. 301-32). New York: Cambridge University Press. LOCKWOOD, W. 1965, An Informal History of the German Language. London: André Deutsch. LOZI, J. 1983, Quoted in Land un Sproch 1, 11. MACNAMARA, J. 1971, Successes and failures in the movement for the restoration of Irish. In J. RUBIN and BJORN JERNUD (eds) Can Language Be Planned? (pp.65-94). Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii. MARCELLESI, J.B. and the GRECO 1975, Basque, Breton, Catalan, Corse, Flamand, Germanique d'Alsace, Occitan: l'enseignement des langues régionales. Langue Française 25, 3-11. MAGUENAU, DORIS 1962, Die Besonderheiten der deutschen Schriftsprache im Elsass und in Lothringen. Mannheim: Duden Beiträge. MAUGUÉ, PIERRE 1970, Le Particularisme Alsacien, 1918-1945. Paris: Presses d'Europe. MATZEN, RAYMOND 1973a, Le domaine dialectal. Folklore et tradition en Alsace (pp. 11-138). Colmar-Ingersheim: Editions SAEP. 1973b, Sprachliches aus dem Elsass: Über die Notwendigkeit der sprachlichen Übergänge. Dialekt als Sprachbarriere? Ergebnisse einer Tagung zur alemannischen Dialektforschung (pp. 77-87). Tübinger Vereinigung für Volkskunde E.V. Tübingen Schloss. 1988 Le dialecte alsacien et l'apprentissage de l'allemand. In ADRIEN FINCK and MARTHE PHILIPP (eds) L'allemand en Alsace (pp. 259-77). Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg. MCCLURE, ERICA, and MCCLURE MALCOLM 1988, Macro- and micro-socio-linguistic dimensions of codeswitching in Vingard. Code-Switching: Anthropological and Sociological Perspectives (pp. 25-51). (Contributions to the Sociology of Language, 48.) Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. MEJÍAS, HUGO A., and ANDERSON, PAMELA L. 1988, Attitude toward use of

< previous page

page_198

next page >

< previous page

page_199

next page > Page 199

Spanish on the south Texas border. Hispania 2, vol. 71, 401-7. MERRITT, MARILYN 1984, On the use of OK in service encounters. In JOHN BAUGH and JOEL SHERZER (eds) Language in Use: Readings in Sociolinguistics (pp. 139-47). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. MEYER, THOMAS 1987, Parents, grands-parents ... Land un Sproch 1, 4. MILROY, LESLEY 1980, Language and Social Networks. Baltimore: University Park Press. MOSER, HUGO 1969, Deutsche Sprachgeschichte. Niemeyer: Tübingen. NEVILLE, GRACE 1987, Minority languages in contemporary France. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 8, 1 and 2, 147-57. OLSON, LARS 1974, Les problèmes linguistiques de l'Alsace vus par un Suédois. Moderna Språk 58, 1, 45-70. 1980 La politique culturelie de la France à l'égard de ses minorités linguistiques. Moderna Språk 74, 3, 237-54. OBERLÉ, R., SLTTLER, L. et al. 1980, Le Haut-Rhin: Dictionnaire des Communes. Histoire et Géographie; Economie et Société (3 vols). Colmar: Université de Haute Alsace et Centre de Recherches et d'Etudes Rhénanes. PARKIN, D.J. 1974, Language switching in Nairobi. In W. H. WITELEY (ed.) Language in Kenya (pp. 189-216). Nairobi: Oxford University Press. Parlers Alsaciens. Encyclopédie de 1'Alsace 1985, vol. 10. Strasbourg: Editions Publitotal, pp. 5838-5883. PFAFF, CAROL W. 1982, Constraints on language mixing: Intrasentential code-switching and borrowing in Spanish/English In JON AMASTAE and LUCÍA ELÍAS-OLIVARES (eds) Spanish in the United States: Socilolinguistic Aspects (pp. 264-97). New York: Cambridge University Press. PHILIPPS, EUGÉNE 1975, Les Luttes Linguistiques en Alsace Jusqu'en 1945. Strasbourg: Culture Alsacienne. 1978, La Crise d'Identité: l'Alsace Face à son Destin. Strasbourg: Société d'Edition de Basse Alsace. 1982, Le Défi Alsacien. Strabourg: Société d'Edition de Basse Alsace. PHILIPP, MARTHE 1967, La prononciation du français en Alsace. La Linguistique 1, 63-74. 1985, L'accent alsacien. Le Français en Alsace (pp. 19-26). Genève: Editions Slatkine. 1988, La koinê allemande en Alsace du XVIe siècle à 1918. In ADRIEN FINCK and MARTHE PHILIPP (eds) L' allemand en alsace. Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg. POLOME, E. Class notes for GER. 381 (Spring of 1987). POPLACK, SHANA 1981. Syntactic structure and social function. In R.P. DURAN (ed.) Latino Language and Communicative Behavior (pp. 169-84). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 1982, Sometimes I'll start a sentence in Spanish y termino en Espanol: Toward a typology of code-switching. In JON AMASTAE and LUCÍA ELÍAS-OLIVARES (eds) Spanish in the United States: Socilolinguistic Aspects (pp. 230-63). New York: Cambridge University Press. REUTER, MIKAEL 1987, Summing up. Journal of Mulitlingual and Multicultural Development 8, 1 and 2, 213-18. REYNAUD, JEAN DANIEL and GRAFMEYER, YVES 1981, Français, Qui êtes-vous? Des Essais et des Chiffres. Paris: La Documentation Française. RICHARDOT, JEAN PIERRE 1976, La France en miettes. Paris: P. Belfond.

< previous page

page_199

next page >

< previous page

page_200

next page > Page 200

ROWLEY, ANTHONY 1983, Das Prfiterium in den heutigen Deutschen Dialekten. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik L Jahrgang, Heft 2, 161-82. SANKOFF, GILLIAN 1980, The Social Life of Language. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. SAVLLLE-TROIKE, MURIEL 1982, The Ethnography of Communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. SCHEGLOFF, E.A. and SACHS HARVEY 1984, Opening Up Closings. In JOHN BAUGH and JOEL SHERZER (eds) Language in Use: Readings in Sociolinguistics (pp. 69-99). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. SCHMIDTLIN, J.P. 1980, L'allemand et les jeunes générations. Land un Sproch 2, 21-22. SCOTTON, CAROL MYERS 1982, The possibility of switching: Motivation for maintaining multilingualism. Anthropological Linguistics 24, 432-44. 1983, The negotiation of identities in conversation: A theory of markedness and code choice. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 44, 115-36. 1988, Code-switching as indexical of social negotiations. Code-Switching: Anthropological and Sociological Perpectives (pp. 151-86). (Contributions to the Sociology of Language, 48.) Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. SCOTTON, CAROL MYERS and URY, WILLIAM 1977, Bilingual strategies: The social function of code-switching. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 13, 477-94. SOMMER, BÉATRICE 1982, La langue et les malades. Langue et Pouvoir (pp. 69-71). Institut Dialectal International: Symposium de Strasbourg, 17-20 Sept. STEPHENS, MEIC 1976, Linguistic Minorities in Western Europe. Llandysul: Gomer. STRAUSS, DIETRICH 1981, Aspects of German as a minority language in Western Europe. In EINAR HAUGEN et al. (eds) Papers Read at the First International Conference on Minority Languages. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. STAUFFER, CHARLES 1979, L'Alsacien et son Dialecte. Strasbourg: Editions Oberlin. STREICHER, JEAN CLAUDE 1982, Impossible Alsace. Paris: Editions Entente. STREICHER, JEAN CLAUDE, FISHER, GEORGE and BLÉZE, PIERRE 1979, Histoire de l'Alsace de 1789 à nos jours (2 vols). Luçon: Editions Nathan. STUBBS, MICHAEL 1983, Discourse Analysis. London: Basil Blackwell. TABOURET-KELLER, ANDRÉE 1972, A contribution to the sociological study of language maintenance and language shift. In JOSHUA FISHMAN (ed.) Advances in the Sociology of Language. Vol.2. The Hague: Mouton. 1981, Regional languages in France: Current research in rural situations. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 29, 5-14. 1983, Comment. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 39, 111-117 1985, Classification des langues en Alsace. Le Français en Alsace: Actes du Colloque de Mulhouse pp. 11-17). Genève: Editions Slatkine. 1988, La situation linguistique en Alsace: les principaux traits de son èvolution vers la fin du XXe siècle. In ADRIEN FINCK and MARTHE PHILIPP (eds) L'allemand en Alsace (pp. 77-109). Strasbourg: Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg. TABOURET-KELLER, A., and LUCKEL, F. 1981, La dynamique sociale du changement linguistique: quelques aspects de la situation rurale en Alsace. International

< previous page

page_200

next page >

< previous page

page_201

next page > Page 201

Journal of the Sociology of Language 29, 59-69. TANNEN, DEBORAH, (ed.) 1982, Analysing Discourse: Text and Talk. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press. THOMAS, ALAN R. 1980, Some aspects of the bilingual situation in Wales. In W. HULLEN, (ed.) Understanding Bilingualism (pp. 147-163). Frankfurt: Verlag Peter D. Lang. TIMM, LENORA A. 1975, Spanish-English code-switching: El Porque y how not to. Romance Philology 29, 437-82. 1980, Bilingualism, diglossia and language shift in Brittany. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 25, 2941. TRUDGILL, PETER 1983, Language contact, language shift and identity: Why Arvanites are not Albanians. On Dialect: Social and Geographical Perspectives (pp. 127-40). New York: New York Univerity Press. UBERTI, LOU 1982, C'est pour demain Camarade alsacien! Raon l'Etape: Editions Fetzer. VALDES, GUADALUPE 1978, Code-switching as deliberate verbal strategy: A microanalysis of direct and indirect requests among bilingual Chicano speakers. In R.P. DURAN (ed.) Latino Language and Communicative Behavior (pp. 95-108). Norwood, N J: Ablex. VELTMAN, CALVIN 1983, La transmission de l'alsacien dans le milieu familial. Revue des Sciences Sociales de la France de l'Est 12 et 12 bis, 125-33. VERDOODT, ALBERT 1968, Zweisprachige Nachbarn (pp. 58-132). Ethnos Band 6. Wien: Wilhelm Braunmüller. VERMES, G. and J. BOUTET (eds) 1987, France, pays multilingue vol. 1. Paris: Editions Lharmattan. VOGLER, PIERRE 1974, La planification du bilinguisme alsacien. Revue des Sciences Sociales de la France de l'Est 3, 210-20. 1981, Graphie des parlers alsaciens à. l'usage des sociologues et ethnologues: l'exemple du mulhousien. Revue des Sciences Sociales de la France de l'Est 10, 123-7. 1984, Langues et langages dans la Vallée de Munster. Revue des Sciences Sociales de la France de l'Est 13 et 13 bis, 177-206. VON POLENZ, PETER 1978, Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. WACH, MONIQUE 1989, Le vécu de l'é1ève dialectophone. In M.N. DENIS and C. VELTMAN (eds) Le déclin du dialecte alsacien (pp. 101-22). WARDHAUGH, RONALD 1985, How Conversation Works. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. WATERMAN, JOHN T. 1966, 1976, A History of the German Language. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press. WELLS, C.J. 1985, German: A Linguistic History to 1945. Oxford: Clarendon Press. WOEHRLING, JEAN MARIE 1983, Langue et Pouvoir/Sprache undMacht. Strasbourg: BF Editions. WOLF, LOTHAR and FISHER PAUL 1983, Le Francais Régional d'Alsace: Etude Critique des Alsacianismes. Paris: Klincksieck. YOX, ANDREW 1990, Paper read to University of Texas-Pan American History Faculty, Nov. 30. ZIMMER, RUDOLF 1977, Dialekt, Nationaldialekt, Standardsprache. Zeit schrift fur Dialektologie und Linguistik (pp. 145-157). XLIV Jahrgang, Heft 2., Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag.

< previous page

page_201

next page >

< previous page

page_202

next page > Page 202

Index A Acts of identity 4, 12, 74, 179 Age as a factor of language use 32, 49, 137 Alemannic 8, 9, 30 Alsatian accent 70 dialect 1, 7, 8, 11, 20, 172, 176 geographical distribution of 56 history 13 identity 20, 149, 180 in the family 48 in the neighbourhood 48 language 22, 29, 30, 31, 32, 35, 43, 44, 47, 48, 72, 178 linguistic repertoire 3 professional usefulness of 156, 159 promotion groups 38 sense of identity 59, 65 teaching of in schools 168 traditions and heritage, symbolic ethnicity 171 usage 50-55 varieties of 10 Altkirch 104-106 Anomie, feeling of 163 Assimilation 15, 17, 24, 35, 55,172 Attitudes of the French government 59 of dialect speakers 147 of non-dialect speakers 156 towards language varieties 66 towards French and Alsatian 3 towards languages in Alsace 68, 146 towards minority languages 2 towards the dialect 45, 49, 69, 158, 167, 170 towards the teaching of High German 176 Autonomist movement 18, 19, 22 B Bantzenheim 104 Basque 2, 14, 37 Breton 2, 14, 37 C Catalan 2, 14, 37

Cercle Rene Schickele 23, 35, 37, 38, 177 City/rural dwelling as a factor of language use 140 Codeswitching 61, 64, 68, 71, 73, 94, 100 discourse functions 95 Cole, R. 49 Constraints on language choice 98 Conversational data 72 Conversational rules 99 Corsican 22, 37 Craig, J.E. 15-17 D Deixonne Law 33 Denis, M.N. 54 Denis, M.N. & Veltman, C. 56 Description of the sample of respondents 109 Dialect 32, 40 as a marker of identity 147 as a salient ethnic marker 174 as a rural phenomenon 173 communicative value of 156 decline of 28, 145 future of 180 in urban environment 31 learning 150 maintenance 35 negative views of 165 promotion/maintenance 150 instrumental motivation to learn 154 speakers 156

< previous page

page_202

next page >

< previous page

page_203

next page > Page 203

usage 40, 41, 46, 47, 48, 56 of German 8, 11 perceived worth of 158, 160 usefulness of 156, 168 Domains of family and friendship 43 of language use 62 E Educational policies 32 Edwards, J. 179 Ethnic activism 23 Ethnicity 17 F Family as the principal agent of acculturation 53 Fishman, J. 62, 180 Flemish 2, 22, 37 Foreign immigration 175 France 13, 15, 19, 26 minorities in 2, 37 Franconian 30 French 14, 16, 18, 20, 21, 24, 25, 29-35, 40-49, 57, 72, 169, 179 educational policies 174, 175 linguistic unity 18 Revolution 12, 15 schools 22 Frenchification 6, 15, 16, 52, 70, 155 G Gal, S. 63, 99 Gender 32, 46, 57, 138, 172 German 16, 24, 25, 29, 30, 34, 35, 40, 42, 47, 178 empire 18 identity 19-20 High 24, 34, 151, 153, 159, 169 knowledge of 45 nationalism 24 standard 8 teaching o f 59 German/French bilingualism 178 Germany 13, 15, 19, 25, 26 Global language use 141 Grosjean, F. 105 Gumperz, J. 69 H

Heller, M. 94 Hessini, M. 25, 26, 29, 34, 40, 58, 72 History of Alsace 12 I Identity marker 63 INSEE 29, 40 K Kettenacker, L. 20 Khettry, F. 1982 51 L Ladin, W. 31, 34, 42 Language activism 37-39 attitudes 4, 107 choice 3, 28, 29, 39, 56, 57, 61-65, 71, 72 distribution 30 maintenance 4 of manhood 170 of solidarity 170 policies 14 promotion groups 5, 177, 178 repertoire in Alsace 30 shift 4, 6, 28, 58, 172, 173, 180 use 4, 28, 30, 40, 56, 57, 107, 113, 119, 122, 126, 127, 133, 135, 136 Le Page, R.B. 63, 179 Linguistic assimilation 16 attitudes 12 choices 65 minorities in France 23 policies 36, 150 unity 21 usage 51 Louis XIV 12 M Markedness 98 Medieval period 14 Minority language definition 5 Minority languages of France 36 Motivation to speak Alsatian 179 Mulhouse 7, 9, 104, 106, 172 N National identity 181 Nazis 19, 20, 22, 25, 26, 35 Neville, G. 28, 31, 34, 37

Newspapers 35, 44 Non-dialect speakers 156, 163 O Occitans 15 Olson, L. 28, 30 Option langue et culture regionales 34, 176 Ottmarsheim 104, 106

< previous page

page_203

next page >

< previous page

page_204 Page 204

P Perceptions about the Alsatian situation 157 Philipps, E 20, 24, 28, 172 Post World War II period 21 Provencaux 2, 37 Psychological and attitudinal factors of language choice 34 Q Questionnaire 103, 106-108, 182, 188 R Radio 44 Regional identity 169 Regional language speakers 36 Regional languages tolerance for 176 in France 22, 33 teaching of 37 interest in 37 Reich Second 17, 25 Third 21 Reported language preference in media (TV/radio) 129 Revolutionary language policies 14 Rural versus urban speakers 53, 54 S School 49 Scotton, C.M. 98 Secret language 170 Sense of identity 180 Shift to French 6, 37, 58, 101 Social class 31, 52 Sociolinguistic research 28 Strasbourg 7, 9 Suspicions attached to speaking a German dialect 3 T Tabouret-Keller, A. & Luckel, F 47 Tabouret-Keller, A. 28, 63 Television 44 U Universal military service 174 Urban versus rural use of the dialect 46, 51, 52 Urbanisation 57 V

Veltman, C. 53 Vogler, P. 69

< previous page

page_204