In:Constructions in Contact: Constructional perspectives on contact phenomena in Germanic languages
Edited by Hans C. Boas and Steffen Höder
[Constructional Approaches to Language 24] 2018
► pp. 211–249
Texas German and English word order constructions in contact
Published online: 12 December 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.24.07dux
https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.24.07dux
Abstract
After reviewing previous accounts of Texas German (TxG) syntax, I define the basic word order constructions of English and German and identify which are identical across the languages (i.e. diaconstructions). Next, I analyze 300 TxG utterances and determine whether their syntax corresponds more closely to German, English, or German-English diaconstructions. Finally, I discuss sentences exhibiting unusual word order and how they demonstrate the need for a (Diasystematic) Construction Grammar approach.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Previous accounts of Texas German word order
- 2.1Texas German(s)
- 2.2German word order
- 2.3Word order in TxG
- 3.Word order in (Diasystematic) Construction Grammar
- 4.German word order constructions and German-English diaconstructions
- 4.1.German word order constructions
- 4.2English-German word order diaconstructions
- (A)Subject precedes verb
- (B)All verbs occur together
- (C)Finite verbs precede non-finite verb forms
- (D)Polar questions require do support
- 5.Analysis of TxG word order
- 5.1Data selection and limitations
- 5.2.TxG clauses with German-origin verbs
- Müssen (‘to have to’)
- Dass (‘that’)
- Weil (‘because’)
- Because
- 5.3TxG utterances with English verbs
- Infinitival clauses
- Polar questions
- Subordinate clauses
- Main clauses
- 5.4.Summary of TxG word order
- 5.5.(Diasystematic) constructional account of divergent TxG syntax
- Multiple lexical transference
- (Inaccurate) complex German structures
- Transferring complex verb constructions with lexicogrammatical interference
- Loan Translation of more general and ‘central’ constructions
- Multiple transference and interference in a single clause
- 6.Conclusion
Notes References
References (55)
Backus, A., & Dorleijn, M. (2009). Loan translations versus code-switching. In B. Bullock, & A. Toribio (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Code-Switching (pp. 75–94). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Barðdal, J., Smirnova, E., Sommerer, L., & Gildea, S. (Eds.). (2015). Diachronic Construction Grammar. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
(2009b). Case loss in Texas German: The influence of semantic and pragmatic factors. In J. Barðdal, & S. Chelliah (Eds.), The Role of Semantics and Pragmatics in the Development of Case (pp. 347–373). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Boas, H. C., & Sag, I. (Eds.). (2012). Sign-based Construction Grammar. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Boas, H. C., & Pierce, M. (2011). Lexical developments in Texas German. In M. Putnam (Ed.), Studies on German Language Islands (pp. 129–150). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Boas, H. C., Ewing, K., Moran, C., & Thompson, J. (2004). Towards determining the influence of internal and external factors on recent developments in Texas German phonology. Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, 10(1), 47–59.
Boas, H. C., Pierce, M., & Brown, C. L. (2014). On the variability of Texas German wo as a complementizer. STUF – Language Typology and Universals, 67(4), 589–611.
Burridge, K. (1992). Creating Grammar: examples from Pennsylvania German. In K. Burridge, & W. Enninger (Eds.), Diachronic Studies on the Languages of the Anabaptists (pp. 199–242). Bochum: Universitätsverlag Brockmeyer.
Clyne, M. (1994). What can we learn from Sprachinseln?: Some observations on Australian German. In K. Mattheier, & N. Berend (Eds.), Sprachinseln (pp. 105–122). Frankfurt: Lang.
Den Besten, H. (1983). On the interaction of root transformations and lexical deletive rules. In W. Abraham (Ed.), On the Formal Syntax of the Westgermania: Papers from the 3rd Groningen Grammar Talks (pp. 47–131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Dryer, M. S. (2013 ). Order of subject, object, and verb. In M. Dryer, & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology (Retrieved from [URL], Accessed on 2017–07–28.)
Dux, R. (2017). Classifying language contact phenomena: English verbs in Texas German. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 29(4), 379–430.
Eisenberg, P., & Gallmann, P. (2016). Der Duden in 12 Bänden: 4 – Die Grammatik. Mannheim, Germany: Bibliographisches Institut & FA Brockhaus AG.
Fanselow, G. (1989). Coherent infinitives in German: Restructuring vs. IP-Complementation. In C. Bhatt, E. Loebel, & C. Schmidt (Eds.), Syntactic Phrase Structure Phenomena in Noun Phrase and Sentences (pp. 1–16). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Fillmore, C. J., Kay, P., & O’Connor, M. C. (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language, 64(3), 501–538.
Fuchs, K. (2018). Word order in dependent clauses in Texas German. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 84, 1-19.
Fuller, J. (1997). Pennsylvania Dutch with a Southern touch: a theoretical model of language contact and change (PhD dissertation). University of South Carolina –Columbia.
Goldberg, A. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Haider, H. (1986). Fehlende Argumente: Vom Passiv zu kohärenten Infinitiven. Linguistische Berichte, 101, 3–33.
(1990). Topicalization and other puzzles of German syntax. In G. Grewendorf, & W. Sternefeld (Eds.), Scrambling and Barriers (pp. 93–112). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Höder, S. (2012). Multilingual constructions: a diasystematic approach to common structures. In K. Braunmüller, & C. Gabriel (Eds.), Multilingual Individuals and Multilingual Societies (Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 13) (pp. 241–257). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
(2014). Constructing diasystems. Grammatical organisation in bilingual groups. In T. A. Åfarli, & B. Mæhlum (Eds.), The Sociolinguistics of Grammar (Studies in language companion series 154) (pp. 137–152 ). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
(This volume). Grammar is community-specific: Background and basic concepts of Diasystematic Construction Grammar.
Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.). (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hopp, H., & Putnam, M. T. (2015). Syntactic restructuring in heritage grammars: Word order variation in Moundridge Schweitzer German. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(2), 180–214.
Jacobs, J. (1986). The syntax of focus and adverbials in German. In W. Abraham, & S. De Meij (Eds.), Topic, Focus, and Configurationality. Papers from the 6th Groningen Grammar Talks, Groningen 1984 (pp. 103–127). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Kay, P. (2005). Argument structure constructions and the argument-adjunct distinction. In H. C. Boas, & M. Fried (Eds.), Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots Constructional Approaches to Language (pp. 71–98). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Keel, W. D. (2014). German settlement varieties in Kansas. In A. W. Farris-Trimble, & J. A. Barlow (Eds.), Perspectives on Phonological Theory and Development : In Honor of Daniel A. Dinnsen (pp. 155–172). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kloss, H. (1977). Die deutsche Schriftsprache bei den Amischen. In L. Auberger, H. Kloss, & H. Rupp (Eds.), Deutsch als Muttersprache in Kanada: Berichte zur Gegenwartslage (pp. 97–98). Wiesbaden: Steiner.
Kuningas, J., & Leino, J. (2006). Word orders and Construction Grammar. In M. Suominen, A. Arppe, A. Airola, O. Heinämäki, M. Miestamo, U. Määttä, J. Niemi, K. K. Pitkänen, & K. Sinnemäki (Eds.), A Man of Measure; Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th Birthday (pp. 301–309). Turku, Finland: The Linguistic Association of Finland.
Louden, M. (1992). German as an object-verb language: A unification of typological and generative approaches. In I. Rauch, G. F. Carr, & R. L. Kyes (Eds.), On Germanic Linguistics: Issues and Methods (pp. 217–231). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Meurers, W. D. (2000). Lexical generalizations in the syntax of German non-finite constructions. Arbeitspapiere des SFB 340 (p. 145). Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen.
Müller, S. (2005). German: A grammatical sketch. In A. Alexiadou, & T. Kiss (Eds.), Syntax – ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung, 2nd Edition. Berlin: de Gruyter
Nützel, D. (1998). Morphosyntactic variation and change in Haysville (Indiana) East Franconian. (PhD dissertation) Purdue University.
Pierce, M., Boas, H. C., & Roesch, K. (2015). The history of front rounded vowels in New Braunfels German. In J. Bondi Johannessen, & J. C. Salmons (Eds.), Germanic Heritage Languages in North America (pp. 118–131). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Reis, M. (1980). On justifying topological frames: ‘positional field’ and the order of non-verbal constituents in Berman. Documentation et Recherche en Linguistique Allemande Contemporaire, 22/23, 59–85.
van Rimsdijk, H. (1985). Zum Rattenfängereffekt bei Infinitiven in deutschen Relativsätzen. In W. Abraham (Ed.), Erklärende Syntax des Deutschen. Tübingen: Narr.
Webelhuth, G. (1992). Principles and Parameters of Syntactic Saturation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cited by (4)
Cited by four other publications
Boas, Hans C. & Steffen Höder
2025. Diasystematic Construction Grammar at work. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 22 ff.
Warmuth, Matthias
2025. Construction Grammar and phonology?. In Constructions in Contact 3 [Constructional Approaches to Language, 40], ► pp. 247 ff.
Boas, Hans C. & Heike Wiese
Dux, Ryan
2020. Code-switching and loan translation in German-American. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 34 ► pp. 52 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
