The Dominanceofthe Swiss German Dialect

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/318146178
The dominance of the Swiss German Dialect in the German part of

Switzerland: an obstacle to learning and using the national language.
Thesis · June 2017

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.36607.71844
CITATIONS READS
0 551
1 author:
Aline Marandet
University of Grenoble
3 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Aline Marandet on 04 July 2017.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

THE DOMINANCE OF THE SWISS GERMAN DIALECT
IN THE GERMAN PART OF SWITZERLAND:
AN OBSTACLE TO LEARNING AND USING
THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE.
THE NON-IDENTIFICATION TO ONE OF THE NATIONAL LANGUAGES,

FACTOR OF LANGUAGE INSECURITY.
MARANDET
ALINE
UFR LLASIC
Language Studies Department
Under the direction of STĒPHANIE GALLIGANI
2015-2016
THE DOMINANCE OF THE SWISS GERMAN DIALECT
IN THE GERMAN PART OF SWITZERLAND:
AN OBSTACLE TO LEARNING AND USING
THE NATIONAL LANGUAGE.
THE NON-IDENTIFICATION TO ONE OF THE NATIONAL LANGUAGES,

FACTOR OF LANGUAGE INSECURITY.
MARANDET
ALINE
UFR LLASIC
Language Studies Department
Under the direction of STĒPHANIE GALLIGANI
2015-2016
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
To Stéphanie Galligani and Marinette Matthey who let me discover unsuspected horizons and gave me the keys
to better understand the mysteries of the Swiss society in which I move about,
To all the inhabitants of Eglisau who got excited by the project and so readily accepted to take part in it by
answering my questions,
To Andrea, for information loaded moments.
A special thank you to Heidi Lötscher for her support and for opening the doors of her classroom while her
agenda boiled over.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................10
PART 1: THEORETICAL FRAME ................................................................................. 12

CHAPTER 1. TERMINOLOGICAL CLARIFICATIONS .........................................................13
A. MOTHER TONGUE
B. FOREIGN LANGUAGE
C. STANDARD LANGUAGE AND HIGH GERMAN
D. DIALECT
E. MEDIAL DIGLOSSIA
F. LANGUAGE INSECURITY
G. SOCIOLINGUISTIC REPRESENTATIONS
CHAPTRE 2. OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY ..................16

A. OFFICIAL AND NATIONAL LANGUAGES IN SWITZERLAND
B. AN ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY IN EVOLUTION
CHAPTER 3. LANGUAGES & SETTINGS IN GERMAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND ..... 19

A. FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGE DISTRIBUTION
B. TEACHING HIGH GERMAN
CHAPTER 4. THE SWISS: PLURILINGUAL AGAINST THEIR WILL .................................22

A. AN INSTITUTION-IGNORED DIGLOSSIA
B. SWISS STANDARD GERMAN
C. AMBIGUOUS CONTACT WITH THE GERMAN PEOPLE AND THEIR LANGUAGE
PART 2: METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE ................................................................... 26

CHAPTER 5. SWISS GERMANS OF SWISS GERMAN DESCENT ........................................27
A. METHODOLOGICAL JUSTIFICATIONS
B. IMPLEMENTATION
C. DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED
CHAPTER 6. TWO GROUPS OF CHILDREN ..........................................................................29
B. IMPLEMENTATION
C. PROGRESSION
CHAPTER 7. A DAZ TEACHER .................................................................................................30

B. IMPLEMENTATION AND PROGRESSION
PART 3: DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 32

CHAPTER 8. THE IDENTICAL ..................................................................................................33
A. LANGUAGE OF THE ROOTS, LANGUAGE OF INTERACTION
B. REGIONAL AND NATIONAL IDENTITY
C. THE SWISS TOTEM
D. LANGUAGE CONSERVATION CONCERNS
E. DIALECTAL WRITINGS
CHAPTER 9. ...AND THE OTHER .............................................................................................40

A. BETWEEN NATIONAL LANGUAGE AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE
B. ORAL PECULIARITIES
CHAPTER 10. IN CONTACT WITH SWISS GERMAN PEOPLE ...........................................45
CONCLUSION ..............................................................................................................................48
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................................................... 50
APPENDICES: ...............................................................................................................................53
We do not accept to consider anymore that some sexual orientations,
Nationalities, religions, if not ‘races’ are superior to others,
But we remain convinced that there are languages and
Manners of writing and speaking languages
That are superior to others.
Blanchet, 2013
INTRODUCTION
I am Swiss, the German language is foreign to me, and the choice of words was to me quite unknown. I lack
the wealth of expressions and felt even more restricted to define difficult notions in this language (Albrecht
Von Haller, 1748, in Schläpfer, 1985, p. 122).
Having lived in the German part of Switzerland for the past twelve years, a fertile ground of
language contacts, I have always been struck by the massive use of the dialect by natives, compared to
that of the national language. Swiss German constitutes the language most readily spoken, sometimes
even written. Its use is generalized in every field, in every media and every social class, apparently
leaving to high German only the smallest share of language interaction. Language plays a major role in
the definition of one’s personal and community identities. It thus seems legitimate to ask ourselves what
relationship the Swiss Germans entertain with an official language supposed to be theirs, and whether
they truly identify with it.
Two observations are behind this reflection:
- When entering school around age seven, and after being immersed in Swiss German, children
find themselves suddenly confronted with standard German which becomes the exclusive language of
instruction for the following three years in canton Zurich. Despite the fact that these two languages are
related, the misunderstanding of some of these children is obvious when confronted with standard
German.
- Some Swiss Germans refuse to express themselves orally in high German, preferring to use
English, French or Italian.
Could the first observation explain the second one, if only partially? Could the school system
constitute a favorable ground for creating language insecurity in Swiss German speakers? How does
this insecurity materialize itself, if it indeed exists? Is German a more-than-foreign language, since the
Swiss Germans prefer English or French to it?
I will first attempt to answer those questions while exploring theoretical concepts that fuelled
my thoughts, and either confirm or infirm our assertion (part 1). Secondly, I will specifically examine
the methodological considerations (part 2) involved in gathering data to justify my choices. Lastly, I
will explore with you, through interviews with Swiss German adults, the representations they have of
their language repertoire. We will then focus on a schoolchildren’s classroom and attempt to understand
their representations of languages at the primary school level, a time when standard language is
10
introduced, that also coincides with learning to read. A teacher of German as a foreign language will
enlighten us on educational considerations of language teaching.
These discussions should pinpoint language insecurity if it exists, potentially giving us insight
into its triggering factors, as Albrecht Von Haller, the Swiss scholar and poet, lets us foresee.
11
PART 1:
THEORETICAL FRAME
12
CHAPTER 1. TERMINOLOGICAL CLARIFICATIONS:
A. MOTHER TONGUE:
Using the term ‘mother tongue’ raises a number of questions, and might cover very different
notions: is it the language of the mother, the first language learned, the language of the land where one
lives? For natives in unilingual settings, these considerations need not be, since the language of the land,
the schooling language and the family language are one. However, in plurilingual environments, using
this phrase can be highly confusing and ambiguous. Dabène prefers to talk about vernacular language
acquired through lineage (1994, p. 55) to designate “means of expression acquired through the very
first socialization within the family cell” (ibid). In order to carry out the necessary interviews for this
research, we have been compelled to use the term ‘mother tongue with our interviewees. It first enabled
us to effectively distinguish Dabène’s “langue d'appartenance” (language of belonging) and “langue de
référence” (language of reference), but also to let representations associated with each language type
emerge. “Mother tongue” as used in our interviews correlate with the common acceptation initially
described by Dabène (1994), before she brought scientific considerations and objections along: it is the
language commonly used in a country, learned independently in a natural environment and through
family interaction. Designated as L1 in Switzerland, Widmer also calls it “parlance” (2004, p. 32). It
relates to the Swiss German dialect or parlance in the German part of Switzerland. Within the collective
wisdom, the mother tongue forms a dichotomous pair with the foreign language.
B. FOREIGN LANGUAGE:
A foreign language, as opposed to the mother tongue in plurilingual context, nevertheless

remains the foreign language of another (Dabène, 1994): the “mother” or “foreign” labels are attributed
depending on our relation to language, more or less close, more or less emotional, more or less familiar.
A native speaker considers his first language as his/her mother tongue, and an English speaker who
learned French at school, is more likely to consider French as a foreign language. Xenity (Weinrich,
1989 cited by Dabène, 1994, p. 35) therefore develops during formal language learning. So in order to
be able to define the mother tongue, you have to look at the acquisition or learning environment as well
as the individuals themselves (Dabène, 1994, p. 28), their personal geographical biographies, their
repertoires and language biographies. On that account, xenity is not inherent in language and could not
define it in any case. Besides, the foreign nature of language varies in intensity: an unknown language
is inevitably foreign, whereas the xenity of a language learned in a school environment will vary
depending on one’s level of comfort or discomfort while using this code. If the foreign code happens to
be the language of the neighboring country, an increased emotional load has been observed, activating
negative stereotypes (de Pietro, 1994, 1995 cited by Goffin, Fagnant and Blondin, 2009, p. 28) that may
in turn impact the languages acquisition process:
13
The past and present rivalries and prejudices can be indeed present. They make up experiences that might contribute
to quite a negative image of the other. Geographical proximity can come with a history of difficult relationships.
Therefore, a neighbor language is not necessarily appreciated (Goffin, Fagnant and Blondin, 2009, p. 29).
C. STANDARD LANGUAGE AND HIGH GERMAN:
The standard language, a phrase used in language didactics since the 1970s, refers to the
common language of a linguistic community (Schläpfer and al, 1982, p. 17), standardized and regulated
to serve the needs of all types of texts. In the nineteenth century in the German part of Switzerland,
educators begin to enforce standard German, to teach at the primary level when it was until then,
reserved for teaching at secondary levels, used for speeches, business or sermons (Schläpfer, 1982, p.
89), in what was considered an impure variation, in comparison with the language of the neighbor. Also
called “high German”, the Swiss German variety of this language features spelling and lexical
peculiarities, in particular with many helvetisms. Reserved for formal use, it is rarely spoken and its
oral realization features specific prosodic and phonetic characteristics that distinguish this “proper
German”, or “written German” from the variety spoken in Germany. For that matter, one might specify
“Swiss high German” to designate the swissified standard language. The phrase “high German”
(hochdeutsch) implies a dichotomous situation where a low-prestige language exists (Schläpfer, 1982,
p. 17); both adjectives “high” and “low” being naturally opposed in terms of value, the high language
presupposes a prestigious variety while the low variety of language, or dialect, is judged less valuable.
A “sense of frustration” (ibid.) might be resulting from the use of such labels, which could explain the
negative attitude of the Swiss towards this language. Also, talking about a standard language inevitably
infers the presence of a language variety that is not standard, and a plurilingual context. This is the case
of the Swiss German dialects, which are the bearers of the Swiss identity, just as Swiss high German is.
D. DIALECT:
Historically, dialects appeared on Swiss territory in the 17th century, while the spoken and
written languages are gradually separating (Schläpfer, 1982, p.121). In the German part of Switzerland,
a native, every day talk about the ‘dialect’ refers to a complex set of traditionally spoken language
varieties, non-standardized, attached to sometimes very narrow geographical areas, and which
vocabulary is largely influenced by Romance languages. One might therefore hear words like “billet”
or “perron” used in dialect (Ott, 1998). This is thus no homogeneous language variety, but rather a rich
and extremely complex set of languages, each of them associated to a definite geographical area, which
allows to identify the speaker’s origin.1 The dialect, deeply anchored in tradition and also called mundart
1
Several websites can allow to identify the geographical origin of a speaker from the transcript of a short text as
orally actualized by him/her. das Chochichästli-Orakel, http://dialects.from.ch/, http://www.pizallegra.ch/.
14
(spoken language), schweizerdeutsch (Swiss German) or schwiizertütsch by the Swiss Germans,
therefore infers an indivisibility of the language from its speakers (Blanchet, 2013). Elias Canetti, 1981
Nobel prize winner of literature, who studied in Switzerland during the First World War, considers
dialect as a language (Widmer, 2004) because of its widespread use. The said medial diglossic situation
organizes the functional distribution of languages on Swiss German territory.
E. MEDIAL DIGLOSSIA
The diglossic situation described by Ferguson (1959, quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 45) defines
an environment where two related language varieties are simultaneously used, each of them having
different and definite functions in the community. The functional distribution according to a
written/spoken axis makes a special case of German-speaking Switzerland, described as a “medial
diglossia” (Fishmann, 1980 and Lüdi, Py and al, p. 32, 1995), where the division isn’t operated
according to the social standing of the interactants but rather according to the situation of
communication and its level of formality. The criteria are not social but functional (Werlen, 1982,
quoted by Flubacher, 2013, p. 175). The language distribution is thus complementary and, to be
conceivable, presupposes a consensus between interactants (Ferguson, quoted by Flubacher, 2013, p.
180), who need to negotiate their choice of language with every new language interaction.
Implementation of this structure is made possible by the high level of complexity of both language
varieties. The lexicon being highly elaborated in Swiss German dialect, speaking about quantum
physics is possible in high German as well as in Swiss German. According to Dabène, diglossic
situations “impose clearly partitioned language uses”. Therefore, language contact isn’t significant and
the transcodic markers so typical to language contact, that might result from language insecurity, do not
apply (Dabène, 1994, p. 87).
F. LANGUAGE INSECURITY
In the plurilingual context in which we set ourselves, the choice of language in an exchange is
consequential to numerous factors such as the desire to claim an identity attribute, to express one’s ties
to a social group using the we-code (Calvet), or on the contrary to indicate one’s divergence in relation
to a group by using a they-code. A gap between the generally accepted norm within a group, and the
production of one particular individual may be a source of ill-being, of embarrassment, or inferiority
feelings called language insecurity, a name attributed to Labov (1973, quoted by Biichlé, 2013, p. 14).
This standard is doubly implemented: used in an objective manner to start with (grammar observation,
syntax etc.) and then also subjectively (social and identity representations). So it is an expression
internal to a linguistic community, in which the standard creates a feeling of shame, fear, a lack of
confidence that occur in some individuals (Biichlé, 2013, p.17). The choice of language can sometimes
15
be a manifestation of it, just as negative sociolinguistic representations towards a language of an
individual’s repertoire.
G. SOCIOLINGUISTIC REPRESENTATIONS
In a language perspective, social representations are “ready for use micro-theories” (Py, 2004,
p. 8), cultural tools made up of beliefs and knowledge that are essential to interpret the world. For
example: the Swiss speak slowly, they are polite and honest, the Germans speak fast, they are
straightforward and strict. They appear in frozen formulas that are highly stereotyped and subjective,
and have the benefit of preserving the message from any sort of attack. According to Dabène (1994, p.
50), the whole of these representations make up the informal status a community grants to its languages.
Their cognitively economical quality makes them naturally attractive and an easy tool to feed
conversations with no major investment to construe a specific situation: the idea has already been used
and proven by many other people before me, the micro-theory is thus credible, there is no need to
question it by seeking other theories. As a consequence, these representations are particularly stable and
persistent. The adhesion to them, however, isn’t systematic, and they can be slighly altered in order to
adapt their validity. For example: “Basel has a rather cosmopolitan spirit compared to Zurich, less Swiss
German, less typically Swiss German as one thinks (idid. p. 9).”
CHAPTER 2. OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY
A. OFFICIAL AND NATIONAL LANGUAGES IN SWITZERLAND
Dabène (1994, p. 41) distinguishes the official and national languages in a manner similar to
that found in the Swiss Constitution. In 1848, there appears for the first time in the Constitution, an
article of law referring to the languages (Py, 1995, p. 33). The Confederation’s law then recognize four
national languages, that is to say, four languages spoken on the territory of Switzerland: German,
French, Italian, and Romansh (used by 0.5% of the Swiss population) and only three official languages,
which are the languages of the State’s institutions used for internal and external affairs: German, French
and Italian.
The official status of the German language in Switzerland usually produces the assumption that
it is the Swiss people's preferred language. But, as Coracini points out (2006, p. 56):
... The mother tongue isn’t necessarily the language of the country where an individual was born;1... It may well
represent a place of suffering, of prohibition or repression rather than that of rest.
1
Here, meaning language of belonging
16
In German-speaking Switzerland, there is in effect no correlation between the status of the
standard language and the identification to it as a language of belonging. Standard language is rather
perceived as a foreign language in German-speaking Switzerland in the face of the generalized use of
the dialect.
B. AN EVOLVING ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY
1. The vitality of parlances:
German speaking Switzerland is geographically divided into three groups, corresponding to the
three major dialect groups: Low Alemannic (Basel region), High Alemannic (with Bern, Zurich and a
portion of Grisons), and Highest Alemannic (German speaking areas of Valais and some areas in
Grisons). Each large city has thereby its very own dialect (Basel-dialect, Bern-dialect, Zurich-dialect),
but each of these is also composed of a number of local varieties, forming a myriad of sub-dialects
(Schläpfer, 1982). Lexicon variation and distinctive phonetics distinguish these varieties, although they
remain very similar to each other1, so that inter-dialectal communication isn’t hampered, as indicated
by Widmer, who designates the local language by talking about “parlance” and “dialect”: “Parlance’s
peculiarities are essentially locution-based, which makes up various parlances. As a result, the
generalized use of parlances does not pose a problem of inter comprehension in German-speaking
Switzerland (Widmer, 2004, p. 32).” Lüdi and Werlen consider a diasystem high German/dialect as a
whole, and thereby regard Swiss Germans as monolingual people (2005, p. 37). Here is how they outline
the Swiss German situation:
Most Swiss Germans are also monolingual. This is the case for 86.3% of the Swiss, 82.5% speaking only the dialect
[...]. In other words, for Swiss Germans, the Swiss German is the main family language and oftentimes the only one
(2005, p. 37).
One percieves here, the language vivacity or rather ethnolinguistic vitality (Giles, Bourhis,
Taylor, 1977, p. 308) driving the dialect. Ethnolinguistic vitality is defined as “a series of socio-cultural
factors that allow a group to potentially behave itself as an active and distinctive entity in its relations
with other ethnic groups” (Hamers and Blanc, 1983, quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 60). According to the
2000 census, dialect is spoken within the family by 90.8% of Swiss Germans (Lüdi and Werlen, 2005,
p. 36), a slight decline (1.3%) compared to 19902, that still reflects the preferred status this language
enjoys, in all of its varieties. The same observation can be made in the work place: dialect remains the
language of preference, with 97.85% of Swiss Germans using Swiss German to communicate. These
1
See the Syntaktischer Atlas der deutschen Schweiz (SADS) by Bucheli and Glaser (2002) which replaces and
supercedes the Sprachatlas der deutschen Schweiz (SDS) by adding a syntactic dimension (Scherrer and Rambow,
2010).
2
See Annex 3
17
numbers uphold the popularity of the dialect which crosses all social and generational strata in any type
of interaction, interactional or social settings, indiscriminately. Since the sixties in the audiovisual
media, the same observation can be made with a consequent raise in the number of programs
broadcasted in dialect. However, this trend does not belong to a typically Swiss, intra-region movement,
but rather to a more global trend of the media at the international level, to turn to a more informal
language, therefore pushing to an extension of the dialect's domain.
2. A written dialect:
Furthermore, dialect can now be commonly found in a written format as SMS, personal letters
and other unofficial texts, a novelty that finds its roots in the sixties and further strengthens the position
of the oral language (Lüdi and Py, 1995, p. 33). The concept of medial diglossia in German-speaking
Switzerland does not account for the more complex diglossic reality anymore and raises an
identification problem:
Accordingly, the language situation in the German speaking region of Switzerland has often been described as medial
diglossia. This rather programmatic distinction, however, does not do justice to the much more complex reality.
People have been writing a variety of texts in their Swiss dialect, for example e-mails, text messages, songs, and
personal letters, especially since the late 1960s (Flubacher, 2013, p. 176).
Again, one can not help but notice the vitality of an ever changing language, that appears to
adapt to the times, whereas other dialects tend to decline in the rest of the world. Indeed, unlike dialects
in general and since the beginning of the 19th century, the high level of complexity in Swiss German
enabled the shift from an exclusiv orality, towards a written format, with the emergence of a dialectal
theater, the publication of literature and lyrical poetry1 (Schläpfer, 1982, p. 96), but also newspapers
such as Blick am Abend which publishes a daily column entitled “Schatzchäschtli” with 90% of the
texts written in dialect (Brohy, 2013)2.
3. A badge of swissitude:
Dialect, a badge of swissitude (Watts, 1999, cited by Flubacher, 2013), regulates the collective
identity beyond the myriad variations in which it is actualized. Research by Taylor (1973) and Giles
(1976), quoted by Giles, Bourhis and Taylor (1977, p. 326) show that members of a group identify with
the language far more than the common cultural heritage3, since acquired characteristics of one's identity
are deemed more authentic and can better reveal one’s ethnicity than statistical characteristics based on
1
Online Swiss book stores have a special section dedicated to Swiss German, such as
http://www.buchplanet.ch/ki/Dialekt-Mundart-87.html.
2
On Mai, 28th, 2013, Blick am Abend was actually published entirely in dialect (ibid.).
3
“It has been found in Quebec, among Franco-Americans in Maine, and in Wales that ethnic group members
identify more closely with someone who shares their language than with someone who shares their cultural
background.”
18
birth data (ibid)1. The prestige of the dialect (ibid., and Ludy and Py, 1995, p.33) is linked to a profound
bond with the language as a cultural vehicle, a symbol of the community and heritage (Widmer, 2004),
that might be explained by the need to recover one’s roots in a globalized world (Brohy, 2013, p. 6).
The dialect’s language vitality (Giles, Bourhis and Taylor, 1977, p. 309) is especially strong and
pervaded by the regional identity, no matter which form it takes, since “it is the collective relationship
to the language that defines collective identity”, not the language itself (Widmer, 2004). A few years
ago, this has again been demonstrated during a referendum trying to restrict the use of dialect in nursery
schools.
4. An attempt to control the dialect and a refusal of recognition:
The referendum on language use in nursery school, rather limiting the use of dialect, actually
strengthened it (Brohy, 2013, p. 5): teaching in the spoken language has been made mandatory in canton
Zurich, where teachers formerly enjoyed a freedom of choice. Nevertheless, albeit the widely preferred
use of the dialects in spoken exchanges, and their written format gradually spreading, they have yet to
receive legal legitimacy:
Swiss German is still far from receiving a judicial status, its strong oral presence is more a matter for
tolerance than law. Whether at the federal level or at the cantonal one, legal texts grant it only a marginal
place, without proportion with its social stature. (Cottier and Gossin, 2014).
Dialect is still not mentioned in the 2010 law on language, and even the very existence of both varieties
of language, as well as their distribution are ignored in the laws on integration2: a situation that is made
possible by the naturalization of the diglossic situation, that makes mentioning it in the law unnecessary
(Flubacher, 2013, p. 177).
Standard language use and that of the dialect, embracing new technologies and social networks,
are moving towards a more intricate distribution than the usual spoken/written distinction.
CHAPTER 3. LANGUAGES & SETTINGS IN GERMAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND
A. FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGE DISTRIBUTION
1. The spoken format:
1
“In this sense then, acquired characteristics (patrimony in Fishman’s terms, Chapter 1) of one’s identity would
be attributed by others as truer expressions of an individual’s ethnicity than those characteristics ascribed by virtue
of birth.”
2
Intergrationsgesetz, and Abundesgesetz über Ausländerinnen und Ausländer.
19
Considered since Fishmann (1971) a medial diglossia, the functional division of languages in
German-speaking Switzerland is organized according to a written/spoken axis. In its spoken form,
regardless of the situation (family, professional and technical environment, in the media), it is the
comprehensive Swiss German that is spoken (Kloss, 1978, cited by Lüdi and Py, 1995, p. 32). Not only
present, it is also predominantly spoken in all government institutions, schools and universities (except
in primary schools), churches and businesses1. Ever since the sixties, standard German use tends to
steadily decline, to the benefit of the dialect at all levels and in all areas (Schläpfer, 1982, p.18). This
assertion was corroborated by the 2000 federal census, indicating that 90.8% of Swiss German families
speak Swiss German, compared with 5.7% who speak both dialect and high German2. Within the
professional sphere, the values vary depending on Swiss German cantons considered unilingual (high
German and Swiss German form a diasystem considered as a whole, as explained by Lüdi in the 2000
census) from 97.3% (Basel-city) to 99.3% (Schaffhausen). This trend is also reflected in the
broadcasting industry. As a consequence, high German serves as an instrumental language subordinated
to dialect (Schläpfer and al, 1982 p.31). It is the written language and the lingua franca used to
communicate with neighboring, non-Swiss German communities and with Germany (Calvet, 1981, p.
23 quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 55). The high language is not the language of choice in social and
professional interactions, its use even tending to decline, to the benefit of the dialect.
2. The written format:
The function of High German as the written language, a traditionally protected space, is now
disputed: the dialect progresses steadily in its written format, and gains ground even if it remains
constrained to the private or unofficial sphere. Now widely used on electronic media, it is also possible
to read and write unofficial texts in Swiss German such as SMS or emails, blogs, chat rooms and social
networks. As a result, Flubacher considers the dialect to be the only “real” Swiss language (2013, p.
186), and the dialect remains the only way of expressing emotions (Watts, 1999 quoted by Flubacher,
2013), increasing in turn the gap between the two language varieties. The functional distribution is
therefore far more complex than the medial diglossia designation lets us imagine, since it isn’t the
written/verbal vector that dictates the choice of language. The type of sociocultural interaction, the
communication settings, the relationship between interactants, the context and the content of the text
itself determines the choice of language for writing.
The rise of English to a standing close to that of an official language in German-speaking

Switzerland conveniently allows one to avoid the discomfort of verbalizing the written language
1
Annex 4 and 5
2
Annex 3
20
(Widmer, 2004, p. 13) in interactions with alloglots. In order to clarify the possible origins of this
discomfort, let us look into how the national language is taught.
B. TEACHING HIGH GERMAN
In learning languages,
There is in each learner, moments of shifting from a diffuse feeling of helplessness and communication failure
into a problem to solve. The feeling of helplessness itself is in fact more crippling than stimulating and does
not drive to a solution on its own.” (Py, 2004, p. 17).
As statistics point out, dialect is the language of 90% of families.1 In some cantons, nursery
school teaching is done exclusively in dialect. After two years of “kindergarten”, at about seven,
children enter primary school and high German, language of the culture, becomes the exclusive teaching
language, both verbal and written. However, we have to admit that a reasonable use of code switching
(Jacobson, quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 154) implements itself in German as a second language courses2
as well as in other courses, to occasionally cope with the difficulties implied by the system. Contrastive
pedagogical material is sometimes used to teach German as a second language to immigrants. For
natives, such material, if it were to be adopted, could help legitimize the dialect by awarding an equal
value to the vernacular as to the target language, enabling to establish better relations between the two
languages, as suggested by Beniak and Canale (quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 153) in Franco-Ontarian
context. It is interesting to note that the standard language courses in ordinary classes are not designated
as “second language,” as courses intended for a foreign audience are, despite being in fact considered
as a foreign language.
To follow Dabène’s recommendations (1994, p. 137), a successful education relies on both

languages being present in the social environment of the child, with functions and positive social
representations in both varieties. Yet, if high German is indeed taught at the primary level, then being
both the spoken and written teaching language, it remains confined to the school environment, and the
students, once out of the class, are exposed to it only in allogot interactions or in a passive manner,
through the boadcasting media. Reinvestment of the acquired knowledge in a social environment is
therefore missing from this equation. As a result, the situation is not very distant from learning a foreign
language such as English, where the protected and somewhat artificial classroom environment remains
the only place for verbal communication, but where the outside world provides manifold opportunities
to practice one’s comprehension skills. Also, given the significant number of teachers of German
background compensates the shortage of Swiss workers, teaching at the secondary and university levels
1
Annex 3
2
Deutsch als Zweitsprache, high German courses for immigrants.
21
is done in both languages, depending on teachers’ likes and backgrounds. Swiss German, although not
the subject of formal education, is widely used to teach other, non-linguistic subjects (Dabène, 1994, p.
47). A situation that might explain the disagreeable feelings Swiss Germans experience while
verbalizing standard German but is surely not the only catalyst.
CHAPTER 4. THE SWISS PEOPLE: UNWILLINGLY PLURILINGUAL?
A. AN INSTITUTION-IGNORED DIGLOSSIA:
To build upon two commonly accepted postulates:
“Swiss German is the language of social interaction” and
“Standard German is the writing language, and that of formal exchange,”
And couple them with another largely used sentence - even in official documents: “Language is the key
to integration,” a question obviously arises: which language is this, the dialect or standard German? As
discussed by Flubacher (2013), the central issue relating to the diglossic situation in German-speaking
Switzerland is largely ignored by official agencies and decision-makers, especially when dealing with
the integration of immigrants. Omitting to treat diglossia in the law, de facto naturalizes it. This lack of
legal recognition of the language stituation in Alemannic Switzerland causes a glottophile relation to
the dialect12 (Blanchet, 2013, p. 3), where emotions and feelings interlock with the institutionally less
valued variety. If we push Blanchet’s logic further, the glottophobia3/glottophilia dynamic inevitably
implies discriminating some language occurences. The prestige of the low language as a variety of
natural language (Flubacher, 2013, p. 184), a result of the cultural wealth associated with the language
(Dabène, 1994, p. 51) like an innate vernacular impossible to learn, renders the hegemony of a system
based on beliefs (for example: Swiss German cannot be acquired) and of the glottopolitical agencies
such as the media and the educational system (Blanchet, 2013, p 2). However, in the case of
Switzerland, institutionalized language domination of the high variety is sufficiently perceived by the
people to have been able to void a referendum aiming to encourage the use of standard German in
nursery schools. The situation is thereby reversed, with the high language being pressured on by the
1
Emotional investment that over values some language varieties.
2
In opposition to Calvet’s glottophagie, or language-eating (1974, quoted by Dabène, 1994, p. 42)
3
Definition of glottophobia according to Arditty & Blanchet (2008) quoted in Blanchet (2013) : « despise, hatred, agression
and therefore global rejection of people, effectively or supposedly based on the fact of considering some linguistical forms as
incorrect, inferior or wrong (percieved as languages, dialects or language usages) used by these persons, in general while
focalizing on the linguistical forms and without always fully being aware of the extend of the resulting effect produced on
these persons. »
22
low language variety, not the opposite. Consequently, the Swiss people are themselves victimized in
the process. Indeed, while public initiatives aimed at discouraging the use of High German, tools
inherent to verbal communication such as phatics and syntactic discourse adjustment for the oral
register, remain spotty or nonexistent, strengthening the we-code/they-code dynamics respectively
associated to speaking Swiss German and High German.
B. SWISS STANDARD GERMAN:
1. Distinctive signs:
Language results from the fact that a community, in order to be, must set a fixed point outside of itself, be it a
language or another meta-social element. Y. Barel calls this process a duplication. He suggests that there are two
kinds. A “mild” duplication which “gets around self-reference”. The duplication is admittedly recognized as
different, “but somewhere remains understood that we are ourselves the instigators of this alterity” (Y. Barel, 1984:
230-231). A hard duplication rekons that “men believe in the exteriority of these warranters,” it is “an almost
complete refusal of social and human self-reference.” (Widmer, 2004, p. 166)
Stemming from a hard duplication, the warranters of the national Swiss language do not belong
to the same nation-state, but are part of an outside state -Germany. Yet, history helping, standard
German is becoming more and more a foreign language (Schläpfer, 1985, p. 18) and dialect constantly
gains ground “in education, at all levels and in every subject, on the radio, television and in public life”
(ibid.). If the written form of standard German doesn’t seem to cause significant problems, the people
are however highly reluctant to verbalize it. Bernard Py mentions a Bernese for whom speaking high
German “it isn’t well accepted, and it creates a distance, it creates a huge distance because it’s always
‘du sprichst besser deutsch als wir’1 (2004, p.11).” Among Swiss German speakers, using High German
is deemed unacceptable and inappropriate. Swiss high German is characterized by numerous
Helvetisms, “linguistic terms that can only be found in standard language stemming from German-
speaking Switzerland and that are common in this type of text,” that single it out from Germany’s
language (Schläpfer, 1985, p. 97): one might say “offerte” in Swiss High German, as opposed to
“angebot” in Germany, “service” instead of “bedienung” etc. This typically Swiss lexicon is unique and
combines to an ethnic speech style2 (Giles, Bourhis and Taylor, 1995, p 321) which includes phonetic
and prosodic variations, in order to develop a genuine strategy of distinction, a will to separate from the
neighbors’ high German. Spelling was also slightly altered with “ss” substituting “ß” as a result from a
lack of space on typewriters’ keyboards in Switzerland, since the cedilla and both Italian and French
accents where needed (Schäpfer, 1985, p.102). This represents a significant departure from the norm in
Germany. Although usually considered a foreign language in its verbal form (Ris, 1983, p. 175, quoted
1
“You speak better English than us”
2
Ethnic speech style
23
in Widmer 2004, p.31 and Lüdi, Py and al., 1995, p.34), the latest PISA studies on standard German
command by Swiss Germans indicates that the national language does not seem to pose any problem as
far as writing skills are concerned1.
2. A labored verbalization
For the Swiss German people, standard German is nothing like a parlance. The verbalization of
this language is a source of unease that they try to avoid when possible, especially when confronted by
the German norm:
While in contact with Germans, the Alemannic Swiss people experience language insecurity when speaking
Standard German, they feel that German people are more comfortable, talk faster and that their vocabulary is
more developed. The underlying message being: we, the Swiss are not comfortable with high German, our
vocabulary isn’t as diverse: a feeling of weakness, of a lesser command of the language, lesser sharpness
(Brohy, 2013, p. 6).
When looking into the origins of the Confederation, it is clear that its foundations were laid on
common parlances, which could explain that the diglossic situation hasn’t succeeded in inducting the
high language as a socialization and verbalization language. It becomes thereby impossible to ignore.
We thus have a situation where the high language is ultimately used almost exclusively for writing,
with a few exceptions such as conferences or some political speeches. The lack of verbal register in
High German is a likely cause for this situation. Hence a complete lack of phatics, a syntax that hasn’t
adapted to oral communication, and shortcomings in styles specific to verbalization of the language.
An individual can then write a scholarly presentation in the national language, but will be put on the
spot, should she/he have to use this same language in an everyday oral act of communication (Schläpfer,
1985, p.103). Fear of using helvetisms also tends to impoverish the language by eliminating synonyms,
so that the standard German spoken in Switzerland seems outdated, more conservative than the
language practiced in Germany (Lüdi and Py, 1995, p. 34). This accounts for the impression that the
Swiss read out loud when they speak (ibid.). Standard German is considered by the Swiss people to be
a foreign language in its oral actualization (Flubacher, 2013, p. 188), inferring a problematic verbal
communication with their neighbors.
C. AMBIGUOUS CONTACTS WITH THE GERMAN PEOPLE AND THEIR
LANGUAGE:
3. About representations:
1
www.pisa.educa.ch
24
The dialectal ideology that emerged after WWI, relying on “mountain” vs “city”-type
dichotomies and on xenophobia, in order to distance itself as much as possible from the German
neighbors, associated with regionalist movements close to extremism, is part of a strategy of
differentiation with regards to Germany, a willingness to assert one’s Swiss identity and avoid any
possible assimilation with the “enemy”. Geographical proximity can come with its share of negative
prejudices conveyed though History (Goffin, Fagnant and Blondin, 2011, p. 29), which withstand the
test of time and can only tediously evolve. Yet, affect is a key feature in learning a language and negative
stereotypes do inhibit both the learning process and the command of the language. Additionally,
students’ perception of the target language model themselves on the negative representations linked to
the learning experience (De Pietro, 1997, p. 27). So that students who have negative representations
toward people whose language they are supposed to learn are, if not doomed to failure, at least bound
to face additional difficulties which they must overcome. The following testimony is indicative of the
Swiss Germans’ attitude towards their high language: “The Swiss Germans would be already pleased
if we understood them, I think they don’t hold it against us to speak good German. But they do hold it
against us to have to speak good German” (Lüdi and Py, 1995, p. 154).
4. About the norm:
The norm, whether objectiv, subjective or otherwise, “applies to all members of a linguistic
community” (Bourdieu, 1982, quoted by Biichlé, 2011, p.14). The Alemannic Swiss and the German
communities use the same written language, it then seems reasonable to classify them in a single, more
global community. However, the lack of oral registrer in Swiss high German that we mentioned earlier
is such that innovations affecting language in Germany do not affect Swiss high German. A divergence
between Switzerland’s standard German norm and that of Germany’s standard German then occurs,
which can, to a certain extend, trigger a language insecurity due to the burden of ideal language
representations (Biichlé, 2011, p.14). It appears in the form of stigmatization of errors (Dabène, 1994,
p. 87), hyper correction, auto-(d)evaluation and sometimes even by silence (muteness) (Labov, Billiez
and Gadet, respectively quoted by Biichlé, 2011).
25
PART 2:
METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE
26
This study is based on behaviors and statements as pronounced by our subjects on their
relationship to language, and by starting from the premise that language is one of the most important
and most representative symbols of ethnicity (Giles, Bourhis et Taylor, 1977, p. 326). Committing to
memory and then reconstructing the facts and processes will help us better understand our subjects’
current perception of Swiss German languages (Perregaux, 2002, p. 83). I will be committed to letting
objective and subjective traits emerge, revealing internal conflicts that underlie a willingness to
perfectly master standard German associated to a denigration of the preferred language, in order to point
out a potential language insecurity (Coracini, 2006, p. 59), and I will try to identify its roots. That said,
due to the limited sample used in this study, but also because “one cannot just take the attitudes
expressed as exactly reflecting an individual’s deeply rooted feelings (Parkins quoted by Giles, Bourhis
et Taylor, 1977, p. 326),” this data should be considered with restraint, the freedom to share or conceal
being naturally complete. Interpretation of data thereby also reflects a personal point of view.
CHAPTER 5. SWISS GERMANS OF SWISS GERMAN PARENTS
A. METHODOLOGICAL JUSTIFICATIONS:
In order to shed light on the presumed difficulties linked to extensive use of the Swiss German
dialect with regards to learning the national language, and the language insecurity that it might trigger,
I wanted to gather language biographies from Swiss nationals born from Alemannic parents residing in
the Zurich area. These persons enjoyed a family policy concerning language, that I consider
representative of the families in German-speaking Switzerland, which should provide useful indications
to try to understand the language education they received and the status of the languages in their
repertoire. The representations that these persons have of the dialect and the national language will also
help comprehend the relationship they entertain with their languages, maybe even by giving us the
opportunity to observe how language insecurity manifests itself, as I suspect it to be widely established
in the Alemannic population. To that end, I turned myself to 5 men and women between the age of 42
and 47, in the active workforce, and living in a small town of 5000 people in canton Zurich. It seems
noteworthy to emphasize the ease with which these persons accepted the interviews, although they knew
very little about the subject of my study. Reasons for such eagerness and the motivations pushing these
Zurich people to answer my questions so readily could be worthy of being explained.
27
This study, based on a limited sample, is largely empirical. The semi-directive interviews will
give rise to a qualitative evaluation to analyze semi-open questions that make up most of the subject
matters covered in our interview guide1.
B. IMPLEMENTATION:
Individual interviews were held in a private classroom I use to teach French, close to the
primary school in the center of town. All of my interviewees live in this same town. For a comfortable
setting, the discussion is carried out around coffee and cookies. Recording begins after the interviewees’
agreement. Since I personally understand Swiss German but cannot speak it, I use the standard language
and most of the interviews naturally adopt an exolingual mode, my interviewees spontaneously
expressing themselves in Swiss German. All of them are familiar with this interaction process which
does not seem to affect them. Also, the elimination of the constraint of having to use Standard German
should offer more reliable and more authentic interviews than if the participants had had to express
themselves in standard language. A few minutes are set aside at the end of the interview, to make sure
everyone can express their opinion or address something that might have been overlooked. These last
minutes seem to constitute a privileged moment where people talk more freely than during the rest of
the discussion. After the interview, they also enable a sort of evaluation of my interview guide, since it
is expected to hear the interviewee’s opinion on the legitimacy of the subject matter as well as their
comments on specific items deemed important to them. A theme that would emerge with hindsight
according to our interview guide could potentially signal its shortcomings. It is therefore an aspect we
will particularly pay attention to. As needed, the guide might therfore be adapted as needed. Translation
and transcripts are simultaneously done within two days after the meetings, to ensure that facial
expressions and gestures, which some subjects abundantly use, are as faithfully listed as their language.
C. DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED:
The first interview was scheduled to happen at the terrace of a café, to offer a comfortable
setting for my interviewee. Aware of her somewhat timid personality, I wanted to find a familiar place
to minimize the anxiety that our situation could generate. However, it was soon clear that this setting
posed a number of issues, both practical and methodological, among which were the noise associated
to being outside and the saluting passerbys. More unexpected was the inhibition generated by this public
place, that seemed quite problematic and echoes the “impact of the communication situation” mentioned
by J. Billiez et A. Millet (2015, p. 8). The uneasiness caused in our interviewee -realized in a steep drop
in tone when discussing specific subjects such as foreigners or the pronunciation of high German by
the Swiss people- while she did not want to be heard, might have hindered her freedom of expression.
1
See Annex 7
28
This interview mode, far from keeping anxiety away as was my initial intention, only participated in
producing it, potentially endangering the face of my collocutor. As a result of the first experience, the
meeting point for subsequent interviews was modified to ensure a more favorable setting for the subject
matter.
Use of the “mother tongue” phrase in interviews did not turn out to be unsettling since our target
people all stem from a diglossia-based area. The medium, whether verbal or written defines the choice
of language which can be assimilated to simultaneous monolingualisms. The choice of words however,
such as “High German”, “written German”, or “German” was under discussion, and occasionally
generated a genuine reflection, one interviewee clearly stating the question “what is high German?”,
even after having used the phrase several times herself.
CHAPTER 6. TWO GROUPS OF CHILDREN
The status of languages and their representations are intimately bound to family on the one
hand, but also to education, hence also to the educational system. It is especially the case in German-
speaking Switzerland where dialect rules daily life and German is only introduced at the time of learning
how to write. It thus seemed crucial to us to gather children’s testimonies. I chose a class of second
graders with children aged between 7 and 9 years. They started learning to write last year and should
be able to express themselves on the peculiarities of each language: standard German and Swiss
German. I believe this to be a privileged place to study the representations these young people have of
their languages. As a matter of fact and unlike other environments we could have chosen to examine,
such as a professional or family setting, this one offers the advantage of being anchored in the high
language that is spoken in class. As opposed to the first interviews carried out exclusively with Swiss
German adults, the classroom’s natural environment, picked out for this group interview1 implies
considering the group itself. Consequently, not all children are Swiss German but have rather diverse
backgrounds. Despite the obvious interest examining the representations of all of these children would
have, in order to serve the needs of our study, we will pay closer attention to Alemannic Swiss children
born to parents native to the area.
B. IMPLEMENTATION:
1
See Annex 8
29
An interview guide was suggested to the teacher to inform her more precisely about this study.
The group interview is carried out in the children’s classroom and in two phases so as to fit within the
teacher’s schedule. The class is divided in two sub-groups. The first group interview takes place in the
morning, the second in the afternoon of the same day. The interviews are filmed to enable an accurate
transcript1 of the speakers’ words. An assistant teacher is there for the special needs of a hyperactive
child.
C. PROGRESSION:
Despite organizational constraints, the project and its theme spark genuine excitement from the
teacher. She even prepared a reflective activity to raise awareness on languages in the previous week.
To start class, she reminds the children of the discussion: a monster ate all the letters, how can one talk
with no letters? Then: if there was to be just one language in the whole world, what would we do? Two
students from the first group receive specific educational support, a logopedist is also involved during
the first interview, she is especially interested in our project. The children haven’t been informed of my
coming, I am introduced to them as they come in the classroom. Small benches are placed in a circle
where we all sit, except for the teacher who stays at a distance. The questions are asked to the students
in standard German, to which they respond in standard German as well, except for a few in Swiss
German. The teacher extends the interview with a verbal expression activity she introduces by using
images of animals. Students are advised to ask themselves whether Swiss German or high German
might be best suited to tell their story.
CHAPTER 7. A DAZ TEACHER
To better understand how the linguistic policy in German-speaking Switzerland is being

implemented, I needed an opportunity to talk to a specialist in the subject. This should allow to grasp
more subtly, the mechanisms relating to learning a language, that could initiate language insecurity. So
I turned to a DaZ2 specialized teacher practicing in primary school. She exclusively teaches standard
German. She may be able to provide valuable information about teaching German to foreigners vs
teaching German in an ordinary class3.
B. IMPLEMENTATION AND PROGRESSION
1
Annex 13 and 14
2
DaZ : Deutsch als Zweitsprache, German as a a second language
3
Annex 6 and 11
30
The interview is carried out in a classroom and is done in French, the teacher's second language
(raised in Romandie by Swiss German mother and German father). The interview mode is the same as
for the other adults.
31
PART 3:
DATA ANALYSIS
32
Switching from one language to another as happens in German-speaking Switzerland, to adapt
to various collocutors inter or intra region, depending on media and contexts, represents a constant
oscillation between sameness and otherness, between what is Swiss and what isn’t, without being totally
foreign or unknown. The natives’ relationship to language in this area constitutes the very expression
of identity, in all its complexity, wishing to be -within the regions- simultaneously identical and
different, but also in its relationship with the German neighbor. In this part, we will first observe what
relates to the identical in the relationship to language by Swiss German people, in other words, dialect
from various angles. Subsequently, we will look into problematic identity issues brought on by standard
German use, and thereby the relationship to all that is Other (Billiez, Millet, 2015, p. 6) in the gathered
corpus.
CHAPTER 8. THE IDENTICAL...
A. LANGUAGE OF THE ROOTS, LANGUAGE OF INTERACTION
The language of the affect, the familiar, the family and the professional sphere (annex 9, l. 65,
117; annex 10, l. 16), the one learned naturally (annex 9, l. 2; annex 10, l. 110; annex 15, l.), dialect is
used in all verbal interactions where Swiss Germans are involved, regardless of the context of the
subject matter (annex 9, l. 55; annex 10, l. 108), as indicated by this person’s testimony: “In fact, if it is
spoken, it is in Swiss German. [...] One can say everything in Swiss German” (annex 9, l. 87, 95), as
confirmed by all the adult individuals we interviewed - with no exception. As a matter of fact, the
following abstract is particularly meaningful:
Q. What are your languages?

R. (Blank) Well, one can say that there are several Germans. There’s the dialect. Each place has a
different dialect. The words are pronounced differently, but their meaning is the same. In Swiss
German. In high German, still, it is a bit different, one cannot compare. And in each place, there
is something different. You notice it in the Unterland1: Rafz speaks differently, Eglisau too, and
towards Büli2, it’s yet something else.
Q. Really?
R. Yes. And it’s only certain words, expressions, names that change.
Q. So it isn’t just the pronunciation then but also the words?
R. Yes, that’s it, truly different dialects. ... With the dialect, it varies a bit.
Q. What do you speak then?
R. I grew up high, in Vallis, but I also had another dialect there then (laugh). Now, it’s a little bit
faded. (annex 12, l. 1-8)
1
A section of canton Zurich.
2
Swiss German name for Bülach.
33
The language here is above all the dialect. As a matter of fact, children clearly express this: if
they mostly speak standard language with their teacher at school, in the schoolyard, dialect takes over,
except in interactions with foreigners (annex 13, l. 5, 7, 15-18 et annex 14, l. 16-17) who usually learn
the high language upon arrival. In addition, it is here the variety of dialects that is emphasized as an
individual pluri-lingualism. Standard language is certainly mentioned, but it is clearly relegated to a
subordinate role and isn’t representative of a person’s language skills. The habits of mothers reading to
their young children are for that matter quite remarkable: a Swiss German mother does not read books
to her child, she tells it. I believe the intimacy of this everyday event, the close emotional tie -since
telling a story is somehow demonstrating one’s love - couldn’t suffer the interference of the standard
language. The mother starts from the printed story, most of the time in standard German and translates
into dialect for her child, thereby ensuring his understanding (annex 10, l. 24; annex 1, l.) as confirmed
by this DaZ teacher1:
When Swiss moms read to their kids, they tell the story, they don’t read what is written. They don’t read
“der junge geht nach hause.” They narrate. They say “lueg da bueb gart hei.” It isn’t the same, “der junge
geht nach hause” and “lueg da bueb gart hei.” You see, “junge, bueb”, they are two different words.
“Nach hause, hei... ” “nach hause,” it’s two words, “hei”, it’s just one. It really is two different languages
(annex 11, l.66).
Besides, this strategy is taken over by school children (annex 14, l.80). Switching to the standard
language is instantaneous in interactions with a foreigner, since the comprehension concerns seem to
motivate and prompt switches to the standard language. In fact, one of our interviews started in standard
language (annex 10, l. 4-8), but as soon as my interlocutor realized that she may if so she desires, use
the dialect and that it wouldn’t impede our understanding during the exchange, she at once changed
codes, the preference for dialect is unequivocal. It is often in interaction with foreigners that standard
language prevails over Swiss German (annex 15, l. 6, 30; annex 11, l. 70; annex 12, l. 46-48), out of
necessity rather than choice.
B. REGIONAL AND NATIONAL IDENTITIES
Talking about language in the German part of Switzerland, goes back to talking about dialect,
it wouldn’t occur to a Swiss German person to address someone in any other language than Swiss
German: it is the language of the land, the one with which one grows up (references are plentiful, to
quote only a few: annex 10, l. 2 et 16, annex 9, l. 8, annex 13, l.15.16.18, annex 11, l. 18-22, annex 15,
l. 44 et 80-82, annex 12, l. 24). So that when introducing the question of the national or official language,
and therefore of standard German, comes the time of protest for 2 of our 5 participants. One of them
1
German as a second language
34
seems to ignore this fact “No, no, high German isn’t a Swiss language for me. We indeed have 4
national languages: Swiss German, French, Italian and Romansh. For me personally, it isn’t a Swiss
language (annex 15, l. 26)”, while the other clearly states his disapproval for this aberration:
Q. It is a national language... Isn’t it, high German ?

A. Well, high German (surprised)? For me, well, it really is Swiss German. High German, it’s... Germany
(large smile). Or else it’s... The language we have to use in books, newspapers... But for me, it is not
a Swiss language (laugh).
This question is somewhat shocking to my collocutors, it is in any case unexpected and perhaps
even considered absurd. To them, there isn’t any ambiguity: the national language of their country is
the Swiss dialect. The Swiss German language is the dialect (annexe 12, l. 108). There is no space for
standard language here, whatever the law might state. There is null identification to the standard variety.
Each dialect is characterized by a unique lexicon and a unique prosody. “Each dialect says
something differently (annex 10, l. 56).” So wherever you find yourself, you may immediately know
where your collocutor comes from. The geographical identification, transpiring through dialects, is an
essential feature of the Swiss German language. Coupled to stereotypes, it constitutes a pool of
sociolinguistic representations on which one can draw to create one’s first impression of a newly met
individual:
We hear the dialect and we have an instantaneous feel “ah, this is a warm Bernese” or “ah, this is a person from
Basle,” it’s a little bit (mimics showing aversion, laugh)... One immediately has a cliché of this dialect and
probably each one differently, but it is quite strong, it depends on the area where we grew up. And there are
dialects that are preferred, and dialects of which people think “oh, no, ouch!” (Annexe 9, l. 70).
This identification seems to be highly appreciated and benefits from a romantic aura. Besides
the fact that this process is inevitably discriminating, discriminations are immediately lessened by the
emotional dimension connected to it “there is sometimes judgment, but it isn’t a problem afterwards
anymore, it is only the first impression [...] but it’s always a little bit...” (annex 9, l. 72-74). Or “I think
it affects me because depending on the person, she/he strikes me as friendly or not, only based on the
dialect, it is the first impression. I think it’s a pity. (annex 10, l.90).” Besides the disparities among
dialect varieties and a lack of homogeneity, they organize into a genuine, geographically representative
language unit, a symbol of German-speaking Switzerland that can unite if need be.
C. THE SWISS TOTEM:
The dialect’s totemic dimension, as Jean Widmer calls it, is noticeable when observing
behaviors in (more or less) foreign territory. “You clearly notice it” in interaction with Swiss French
35
speakers or more broadly, allogots. Everyone stubornly wants to use their dialect or their
language. (annexe 15, l.60)”, “I know that a lot of Swiss people [...] realize that a person doesn’t
understand, or doesn’t completely understand what they say, but they keep on talking in Swiss German
(annex 11, l. 116).” And “it would otherwise be necessary for the Swiss to speak good German, and
they so dislike this, they have so much trouble sich überwinden dazu1, that they prefer speaking Swiss
German.” (annex 11, l. 118). The affinity for the dialect to the point of becoming a hindrance, is striking.
It causes negative representations toward dialect speakers who find themselves trapped as the cause and
the result of their insecurity come from their unwillingness to use the high variety. It is a source of
insecurity due to the lack of practice in high German, making Swiss standard German a rusty version
of the language. Language repertoires evolve and adapt according to one’s needs. So when a language
of the repertoire isn’t used, the repertoire evolves to take this into account. And insecurity increases,
contributing to nurture negative representations towards this language. Dialect assertion however, does
not stop at the border of the Swiss territory, it may also be observed in interactions with Germans within
their own land. Take for example this grand-mother who, in spite of a perfect standard language
command, persists in speaking the dialect on the other side of the border, knowing full well that she
will not be understood:
I believe the Swiss wants to keep his identity. That’s why... We always defend ourselves a little bit to use this (the
languages). [...] When we go to Germany, my mother, she doesn’t speak high German. “We go to the restaurant,
here comes the lady: “What would you like?” “Yes, I’ll have a coffee, for you a coke, Mom, what do you
want? “Yes, I’d like a “helli schaale”... What? She doesn’t do it (annex 15, l.108)!
Both the terms “dialect” and “Swiss German” are freely used during the interviews to designate
the Swiss German parlance. In this case, however, the “Swiss German” phrase becomes a problem:
R. Yes, in my case, the dialect is mixed up. I have something a bit... I have some words from Grisons.
I snatch a bit everywhere. We had a season when I worked, and when you always hear the same thing,
you end up using it too.
Q. Sure! But is it still Swiss German?
R. Yeah, yeah (mimics)... Well, the Swiss dialect. (annex 12, l. 10-12)
This abstract was at the very beginning of an interview. The participant rewords the proposition “Swiss
German,” her pout clearly indicating that the phrase isn’t suitable to describe her reality and calls for
negotiation. The phrase “Swiss dialect” is preferable. Both phrases cover the same reality but their
representative value is distant since the traditional dimension, the typicity are not rendered in the “Swiss
German” phrase. So instead of resorting to a phrase reminiscent of the neighbor, and using it as a
1
To get over this stage
36
referent, a switch in perspectives is operated that enables no confusion but refers to the same typically
Swiss code, thereby reestablishing the emotional proximity to the signified.
Use of the generic term “German,” sometimes rather freely employed to designate a language,
can sometimes be confusing. Take this abstract, for example:
Q. German, is it a mother tongue for you, good German?

A. (Nods her agreement) Yeah, yeah... As a matter of fact, for us, we distinguished this, we said L1, the first
language you learn. It is in fact in the first months of your life, it’s the mother tongue. L1 for me is German,
not French. So the foreign language, the first foreign language that I learned, that’s French. But in the end,
I spoke it better than German, because at school, you have all the vocabulary that you learn, that you just
don’t have at home. As you say, at home, you really have a vocabulary that is quite limited, like “you want
to eat, you want to drink something, let’s go to bed.” Well, it always revolves around the same topics,
whereas at school, you read books, there are really fascinating topics.
Q. How about Swiss German then: what’s its place here? Is it a mother tongue as well, what is it?
A. ...Hum, the mother tongue, that’s Swiss German!
Q. Ok, Swiss German.
A. Yeah, it isn’t good German. ...Hum, the mother tongue, that’s Swiss German. Personnally I make the
distinction, because I think there’s really a difference. I think lots of people would answer “German,” but
you have to distinguish Hochdeutsch and Schweizerdeutsch, it is not the same. So in fact, my mother
tongue, the first I talked with my parents, is Swiss German. (annex 11, l.17-22).
The participant expresses herself on her first language, that she considers to be German. But after
reflecting on this, her discourse gradually brings her to state that her mother tongue is in fact Swiss
German. Slip of the tongue or confusion with no special significance? It seems fair to wonder whether
this wouldn’t be an unconscious attempt to legitimize the Swiss parlance, or the expression of a
commonly used social representation (Py, 2004, p.11). I personally believe this occurrence to be
relatively true to the subconscious of this person. Even more so when considering the question of
Romansh, national language, as opposed to the Swiss German dialect which has no legal legitimacy,
hinting to an impression of inequity.
The dialect, a Swiss German crest, is naturally a source of concern, as with any identity badge.
Its preservation is a recurrent debating subject, the debate surrounding dialect use in nursery schools
being an example therof. This highly sensitive issue directly touches the Alemannic identity
preservation and gives rise to impassioned discussions.
D. LANGUAGE CONSERVATION CONCERNS
Dialect varieties are based on prosodic specificities that are considered a regional wealth where
“every small nest has ... another way of expressing itself” (annexe 12, l.74), so that within an area of
37
about 15 kilometers around us, one of our participants can name no less than three dialect varieties, a
source of great pride. Paradoxically, a feeling of unity also occurs, since beyond their diversity, inter
comprehension remains possible between exolect speakers. Dialects make up the we-code of the
Alemannic people, each of them individually being passed as part of an inheritance to the younger
generation:
Here in Switzerland, there are various dialects, and it’s important to preserve them, to pass on as many as
possible. That’s why I try to teach the dialect from Aargau to my daughter .... I save it, it belongs to me,
the language, the mother tongue. (annex 15, l. 100-104)
Such proximity among the dialects inevitably infers a constant contact between languages: “I
grew up high, in Vallis, but then I also had a different dialect there. Now, it’s a little bit faded (annex
12, l. 10),” so that inter variety code switching is commonly used (annex 12, l. 8) and the fear of
eradication of one’s own dialect, continuous. Just like this father from Aargau, now living in the Zurich
area, who sees the transmission of his dialect fade for the benefit of the language of his current place of
residence. While talking about his daughter: “She speaks the dialect of Zurich of course, but it is already
quite different, you notice it right away (annex 15, l. 102).” The language wealth management between
Swiss Germans is already manifold, but immigration and tourism make for an even more complex
situation. A tourist from neighboring Germany expresses him/herself in the standard language, he/she
is de facto propagating the high language to previously protected circles; as a consequence he/she is
considered a source of danger for the local language:
“It once was that everyone knew the dialect.” Then, Switzerland became a little bit touristy and then we all
used high German. Well, in general, that’s what people say happened. When the first tourists came, you just
had to be able to talk to them. Well, the elder said so. For us, the young people, it spread out through school.
But it really is too bad, the city dialect was somewhat (hesitating) lost. (annex 12, l.60).”
According to folk wisdom, tourism would hence have eradicated the dialect in the urban areas. But
according to the 2000 census data, even if the country/city distribution isn’t specifically represented,
one can only notice how far away the danger is and how dynamic the use of dialect is (annex 3 et 5).
We are therefore faced with social representations feeding on fears related to tourism as a novelty for
these now elderly people.
An overestimation of the low language variety occurs occasionally, as for the following
participant who considers dialect to be “little accessible” (annex 9, l. 37) after asserting how similar
dialect and standard language are: “Swiss German and German never seemed to me as very far-off,
very different because they are simply... It’s as if... you automatically learn that (ibid., l. 21).” Excessive
emphasis on the low language variety arises, in my opinion, from a strong will to preserve dialect as a
secret code to which only insiders can have access, and that reinforces clan representations. Inter
38
regional prosodic and lexicon variations are a wealth for native Swiss Germans (annex 12, l.10-12). By
contrast, the prosody of migrants using the dialect is a source of conflict that seems to be heavily
criticized. It appears quite difficult to accept from this participant who leaves us with an open-ended
sentence:
Well, personally when a immigrant child comes, to start with there is the issue of the climate, with people,
different people, a different climate, a different language. So it might be just as well just high German,
because dialect, it sounds... (annex 12, l.68)
It is quite possible that preservation endeavors regarding the oral language might have found a
new vector in dialectal writings’ infatuation. A prized tool when phrasing unofficial documents, the
writing medium makes it possible to phonetically freeze language specificities. Although the lack of
standard does not contribute to a high reliability of data, emergence of such tools as “das Chochichästli-
Orakel 1” shows that identifying phonetic parameters of local varieties is possible.
E. DIALECTAL WRITINGS
Texts written in dialect seem to be used by most of our participants, children excepted, but they
are not always appreciated due to the comprehension difficulties they lead to and the uncertainty as to
the actual message being indeed delivered:
Strangely enough, everywhere, my friends write their SMS in the spoken language, because they like that.
Personally, I got used to always speaking high German, well I write it! So that I don’t have to always think
“oh, can they read my Zurich dialect?” (Annexe 12, l. 126).
In fact, writing in the dialect requires an additional reflection from the penman, on one hand as to the
code he/she wants to use, but also to draft his/her message since Swiss German isn’t standardized. It is
this additional reflection phase that is problematic to some of our interviewees, that sometimes makes
dialect writing stifling “it doesn’t suit me, I’m so used to writing in high German, it’s faster. And I
cannot read Swiss German properly [...] I need to concentrate so much, because I am not used to it
(annex 10, l.94).” Once the message issued, deciphering it is also arduous and everyone is aware of the
mix-up potential. These communications are not as “flowing” as they would be in high German (annexe
12, l. 132 et 138). This child tells an anecdote about his mother reading him a letter received from his
great grand-mother:
My great grand-mother, she died two years ago, she always sent lots of letters, and it was always in Swiss
German. And I couldn’t read them, my Mom always had to read them to me. For her it was so hard to read and
she always read so funny, and I didn’t understand why she read like that. (annex 13, l.145).
1
http://dialects.from.ch/
39
This mother doesn’t just read the letter, she has to decipher it in order to understand it. Nevertheless,
such hazards are far from being deterrents for most Swiss Germans, who use this code by and large in
their unofficial communications but also in more singular way, to draft their professional emails’
closure (annex 11, l.140-142 et 152-154). The closure then takes a distinctive value where the code
itself serves as pledge of allegiance to a group. The lack of spelling and grammatical rules renders this
an attractive alternative and can also be a motivation in the choice of writing language “in Swiss
German, you can write however you want, there are no rules. You can write like this, and I like that.
[...] To understand though, for the others it’s harder. (Annexe 15, l. 74).” The emotional distance plays
a key role in the choice of the writing language, especially when interacting with kids:
SMS with my children. At first, it really bothered me, but in fact they write to me in Swiss German,
and then I have to respond in Swiss German to make sure we are on the same level and for...
Communication is better. If you write in good German, if you wrote in good German, there would be
more of a distance, [...] more distance emotionally. You are much closer when you write... I don’t
know, wenn chumcht hei, rather than wenn kommst du nach hause?1 It’s “oh, Mom isn’t happy!” ”
[...] Yeah, but wenn chumcht hei, it’s... It goes well. Dörf i no feuf minutä? Nein du kommst sofort
nach hause2 oder… (Annexe 11, l. 140-144).
As in the email or letter closure, the SMS written in Swiss German passes on a linguistic message, but
also hints as to one’s interlocutor’s mood and emotional tendencies associated to it. The multimodal
results, prototypic of code switching, would not have been possible with one unique code. It uses the
stereotypes and representations (Py, 2004, p.11) associated to the high language and the German
neighbor, to infer an emotional dimension depending on the choice of code. The message written in
standard language comes through as harsh and authoritarian (annex 10, l. 140-142) whereas Swiss
German evokes gentleness, maternal love (annex 9, l.47; annex 11, l.140-144). Representations are
hence a fertile ground the group can draw on to augment the written exchange.
CHAPTER 9. ...AND THE OTHER
A. BETWEEN NATIONAL LANGUAGE AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE
High German, “no... No, it has nothing to do with Switzerland, it’s as if it was something
else.” (annex 9, l. 30). To ask whether the national language is a Swiss language triggers bursts of
laughter from some of the participants (annex 9, L.30; annex 10, l. 44-46) as after a good joke. To
others, the question seems to never have been asked (annex 15, l. 26) and is difficult to explain. For one
1
When are you coming home?
2
Can I stay five more minutes (Swiss German), no, come home right away (High German).
40
last interviewee, it triggers an actual reflection process, but the answer is clear-cut: “No... No...
Hochdeutsch isn’t a Swiss language.” I don’t know of any canton where one speaks exclusively
Hochdeutsch. It doesn’t exist. They are all dialects (annex 11, l. 44).” This national language is therefore
not characteristic of the Swiss German people and of the images associated with its language. Its
language purports to be verbal, standard German being understandably “simply the language in which
we write (annex 9, l.32),” “it’s Germany (annex 10, l.46; annex 15, l.28),” “it’s the language of the
German people (annex 9, l.107).” The national language facilitates exchanges with those “outside
Switzerland (annexe 9, l.38),” it’s the language of attainability along with English in Europe. The
national language is deprived of the identity attributes usually attached to this status. Sometimes
assimilated to a foreign language “it’s the Germans’ mother tongue (annex 12, l.22),” it is also a
language of interaction with “outside” and foreign countries, tourists, the schools’ language, the
language of books and newspapers (annex 9, l.24-28, 32, 38; annex 12, l.60) that will not ever be
verbally used among Swiss people (annex 9, l.62). One then has to understand how much of a hindrance
speaking standard German is (annex 12, l.13-16; annex 9, l.4). This feeling is expressed identically by
these two Swiss individuals who accept to speak high German “when I must (annex 12, l.16, annex 10,
l. 4).”
For children acquainted to this second language early on, in particular through television, high
German does not seem to cause any learning concerns at school. Like the adults, they agree on the fact
that it isn't a foreign language (annex 14, l.63-72). It then benefits from an intermediate status, a sort of
semi-foreign language that Swiss German kids readily use when playing among themselves, with
siblings (annex 14, l.40, 62, 90, 120) or friends (annex 12, l.60; annex 14, l.136). However, modulating
this data might be deemed necessary. As a matter of fact, according to this teacher of German as a
second language, a course intended for migrants, (not for Swiss who need to learn standard German
when entering first grade) lexicon mix-ups are common and often assimilated to high German:
I remember that at the very beginning, I always said “tue das in den kübel,” das ist falsch, es ist nicht ein kübel
auf hochdeutsch, es ist ein abfalleimer. ‘Wirft das‘, und man sagt nicht ‘tue das‘, sondern ‘wirft das‘, genau
genommen: ‘wirf das in den abfalleimer‘ oder ‘in den eimer1‘. Well then it really is... Bad translation. “Zieh
deine finken an” ist nicht hochdeutsch, man sagt nicht finken. Finken ist schweizerdeutsch, du muss dann sagen
“ zieh deine hausschue an.”2 As a matter of fact, we always have parents who come at the beginning of the
school year and say “it is written ‘finken’, ich weiss nicht was finken sind.3 Es steht mein kind muss finken in
die schule bringen. (annex 11, l.76)”
1
The teacher discusses the sentence “throw this away in the garbage can”
2
She goes on explaining the use of the Swiss German word (finken) for slippers in High German texts.
3
I don’t know what finken are.
41
Used deliberately or not by teachers in communicating with parents, those lexical mix-ups create
confusion among non-Alemannic people since they either do not appear in standard German
dictionaries, or cover a very different meaning as for “kübel,” that means “bucket” in High German and
“trash can” in dialect. So why use these terms that aren’t in keeping with the document’s language,
and/or with the idea meant to be expressed? Is code switching used in this case to fill an occasional
lexical gap in high language, as expressed by one of our interviewees: “You just don’t use high German
every day, I don’t use it all the time. But you get quickly used to it. You might get a dialect word and
the other asks what that is (annex 12, l.100).” Is it a language enhancement technique, as mentioned
earlier, to augment the message with emotions? I believe it might be both at the same time. When
observing the above abstract from annex 11, the word “finken”, meaning “slippers,” is indeed very
much used in German-speaking Switzerland and might even be among the widely used terms that
become difficult to activate when switching codes. Additionally, from nursery school until primary
school, children must bring their slippers to school and all wear them during class. The word “finken”
in Swiss German translates into “hausschue” in standard language. However, both words are not equal,
the dialect variety carrying an emotional dimension with it: slippers infer well-being, home and comfort
for these young children. It is therefore difficult for an Alemannic person to convey all this by using the
standard language “hausschue”.
The German language can nevertheless happen to enjoy positive representations, as one might
notice in the atypical family policies of two of the families mentioned in our interviews. Some parents
chose to forbid dialect use to their children (annex 12, l. 60), not only within the family cell but also in
interactions with their friends “we are forbidden to speak Swiss German (annex 14, l. 55).” One might
extrapolate on the motivations leading to such a practice, but the ban itself, and the lack of tolerance it
presupposes, puts it back to particularly negative representations of the spoken language, or to external
considerations such as a migratory project.
Regional and national identity values are intimately linked, to the point that the Swiss German
identity is often assimilated to the Swiss identity as a whole: non-Alemannic regions amounting to being
considered as foreign territories (annexe 9, l.38; annexe 10, l.62; annexe 9, l. 24), while Germany’s
xenity seems to be lessened.
Q. Do you sometimes speak German then? I mean, outside of school.

S. Yes, when I have a meeting with parents. Yes... Right, that’s it. With foreigners, isn’t it?
Q. Ok. Not otherwise?
S. Yes, otherwise with German friends, then i think “oh!” (annex 9, l. 1-26).
On an alterity scale, a Swiss German would then be closer to a German person than a person from
Tessin or the French part of Switzerland, an implicit representation that echoes Giles, Bourhis and
42
Taylor for whom “members of an ethnic group identify more closely to someone who shares their
language than to someone who shares a common culture (1977, p. 326)” Even if they don’t appear to
have to impact on Swiss Germans’ written competences, these national language representations are
much to bear when the need to speak the language arise.
B. VERBAL SPECIFICITIES
“German language”, (A.12, l. 111), it’s terrible! Terrible! It’s like... Mothers in law. It’s so
embarrassing because the intonation is really Swiss, with the Swiss accent (annexe 9, l.46).” This
speaker faithfully summarizes the perception of Swiss German society when confronted with the oral
use of the standard language. Swiss Germans’ comments regarding the Swiss accent in high German
are actually quite unforgiving, but also usually associated to the Other and not to oneself. Here are a
few:
Annex Swiss Intonation in standard language German Intonation

9 Terrible! Abrupt (l.47)
Like mother in laws, Not so soft (l.47)
Embarrassing (l.46)
Politicians speak an awfully ugly high German (l.46)
One can hear the dialect
It isn’t really... professional
Might as well use the Swiss German (l.49)
They didn’t practice
One has to work at it a little bit (l.51)
It bothers me
It is so embarrassing to me (l.53)
I go to a lot of trouble to speak a nice German and they think “that’s a Swiss
speaking her Swiss German” (l.38)
10 One talks with an accent (l.66) It’s so beautiful l.124)
I know that it isn’t so nice because of the accent (l.22)
Tonality isn’t so nice
It isn’t really nice
It’s a bit heavy (l.124)
11 They have an accent [...] absolutely atrocious
Absolutely ridiculous, almost hilarious
I hear Swiss people [...], and I say “oh, my!”
It kind of hurts your ear (l. 70)
There’s a kind of shame, not being able to command it better (l.72)
Table 2: Expressions used to describe spoken standard language in

German speaking Switzerland and in Germany, in three interviews- summary
43
One of the interviewees doesn’t find words strong enough to express her revulsion of hearing
standard language spoken by Swiss people, so that her sentence remains open. Besides, she recounts an
episode when as a child, she had the privilege of reciting a poem in standard language, when the other
kids in her class had to do it in the dialect. To her, the reason for that relies exclusively upon being able
to pronounce high German correctly. Would the German language be so beautiful as to not be able to
withstand variations? I do not think so: even though it seems clear that German prosody represents an
ideal (hard) to reach, it seems just as essential when touching to the dialect, explaining the Alemannics’
aversion for foreigners using the spoken language. The weight of these expectations can be a heavy
burden, particularly within the public space, where self-judgment combines with the sometimes acerbic
evaluation from others. In the interaction with German nationals, aspirations to a perfect production in
the high language are met with a different set of norms which can be a source of conflicts despite all
the efforts mobilized:
But it is really strange, once [...] with a German… I spoke in German and he thought I was talking in Swiss
German. And I gave myself a lot of trouble to speak well in high German, but I thought “what”? This is an
insult! If you only knew my language! This is not at all like my language! We are talking about something very
different! (annex 9, l. 127-129)
These daily upheld representations render the practice of spoken standard German frustrating and
unacceptable by the Swiss German people. Figure 1 illustrates this dynamic. As a spiraling effect,
verbalization of the high language is avoided, resulting in a lack of practice and in turn leading to both
a problematical communication with German neighbors, perceived as guarantors of the standard, and
to an auto- and hetero-evaluation which, due to the demands in terms of personal and community
representations, cause a patchy command of verbal specificities in the high language, and encourage to
avert it. As a matter of fact, studying standard German orally at school isn’t necessarily perceived as a
speech training, but rather as a strategy to strengthen the students’ writing skills: "During class, we had
to speak in High German. [...] Well, from a writing perspective, it is also better when the class talks in
high German, you can then better write (Annex 12, the.30). “
44
As opposed to the negative representations of adults relating to the oralization of the standard
language, creative strategies seem to sometimes crop up, which allow for a more bearable representation
of the situation, thanks to view-point shift: "The Swiss… They use the [r]1 a lot and the Germans, they
do not pronounce it well (annex 15, l. 42)." The reference point is no longer the language of the Other
but one’s own language, against which the German accent is assessed. The newly generated
representations are shaped on this new referent and are de facto positive linguistic representations.
However, this perception appears to be an exception.
We have observed how the individual or communal representations pervade in Swiss German
territory, whether one subscribes to them or not. Let’s now look more closely at the relationship between
languages of interaction and linguistic insecurity, and the impact of these parameters on the situation of
communication.
CHAPTER 10. IN CONTACT WITH SWISS GERMAN PEOPLE
In line with our research, I was keen to schematically represent the relationship the Swiss
Germans have to the oral varieties of their languages. The language insecurity figure by Biichlé (2011)2,
which will be the basis for illustrating what type of insecurity is activated depending on the people
1
Rolled as in Spanish
2
Annex 1
45
present and the languages of interaction. It also shows the impact on the exchange, in order to link the
representations to their practical consequences on the situation of communication.
Table 1: Biichlé (2011) representation, adapted to German-speaking Switzerland

in the oral practice of the standard language and the dialect
Dialectal monolingualism Bilingualism Standard language monolingualism
Inter- or intra-region Contacts with non Indiscriminate Inter- or intra-region contacts with non-
contacts with Swiss -Swiss Germans interlocutors contacts with Swiss Germans German speakers
Germans
◄-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------►
Language insecurity
Non-existent Strong Non-existent Non-existent Non-existent
To strong
SOCIAL INTERACTION
Social abundance Isolation / exclusion Isolation / exclusion Isolation / exclusion Social abundance
To abundance
Table 1 presents a continuum from dialectal monolingualism of the Swiss German population,
to bilingualism (which constitutes the most frequent1 case), and to verbalized, standard language
monolingualism. Dialectal monolingualism is naturally purely utopian in German-speaking
Switzerland, since any literate person necessarily learned the high language; standard language
monolingualism, if at all possible, remains no less extraordinary, and I must admit not having ever had
a chance to meet such a person. But in dealing with the verbalized language form, these parameters
have been selected to delineate our theoretical framework. This continuum is then connected to
linguistic insecurity depending on the interactant’s type, so as to highlight the kind of social interaction
resulting from it.
At the extremes, two favorable situations can be noticed, both in terms of social interaction and
language insecurity in interactions involving a monolingual speaking the dialect and Swiss Germans:
the repertoires are (relatively) symmetrical, language insecurity is non-existent, leading to a convergent
interaction and to social abundance. In interactions between high German monolingual people with
non-Alemannic people, the outcome is similar. For a bilingual Swiss German person, social interaction
depends both on representations this person has vis-a-vis his collocutor (willingness to converge or
diverge) and on the idea that the person has of her/his command of the languages in her/his repertoire.
A strong language insecurity leads to the isolation or exclusion from social interactions (Annex 9, l.
1
Annex 4 and 5
46
127-129), but the bilingual individual can just as well find himself/herself in a situation of social
abundance when linguistic insecurity is non-existent (Annex 15, l. 20), or relatively mild. The dialect-
speaking monolingual person is placed in a difficult situation with non-Swiss German speakers, or even
be at a disadvantage1 since her/his collocutors are likely to request to switch to another code. Linguistic
insecurity is likely to be strong for a Swiss German tending to reject or isolate his interlocutor, in an
attempt to preserve her/his face (mutism then being a possiblility). In the case of a high German
monolingual person interacting with Swiss Germans, rejection also flares: it is indeed expected of
members of the same ethnicity (annex 9, l. 40; Annex 10, l. 4; Annex 12, l. 46-48), to practice the
language of this same ethnic group, yet, high German is treated as an (almost) foreign language (Annex
10, l.46; Annex 15, l.28). Even if this interaction does not give rise to language insecurity, it will
nonetheless result in a failure, since the choice of language is likely to be assimilated to a strategy of
divergence in relationship to the interlocutor.
1
Few non-Swiss Germans learn to speak the Swiss dialect, the majority of them are high German speakers.
47
CONCLUSION
The initial motivation behind this research was to understand whether the national language
does carry an identity dimension in a region where the dialect prevails in verbal interactions, and if it is
the case, how it is perceived, taught and used on a daily basis. We wanted to check if there truly was a
linguistic insecurity in German-speaking Switzerland as we assumed, possibly born from the school
system. Standard German's official status and the absence of legitimate position for the dialect,
associated with an extraordinary ethnolinguistic vitality, allowed us to understand the framework in
which Swiss German people evolve. The dialect's symbolic dimension in Swiss society and its
acceleration in reaching media where it was previously non-existent, in opposition with its eradication
from the classroom during the first school years, permitted us to measure its evolution with respect to
the high variety and to comprehend the space the languages respectively occupy. Many parameters
suggest that Swiss Germans perceive their plurilingualism as a weight rather than an asset. They are
compelled to use their skills, sometimes only with much reluctance do they resolve themselves to it;
which infers a substantial level of language insecurity, supported by (rather) negative representations
of the verbalized high language, but also on representations associated with their German neighbors.
The interviews carried out among adults and children, indicate a total lack of identification with
the national language. Swiss German is considered as representative of German-speaking Switzerland.
However, reality does not agree with this perception, at least with regard to the Federal
Constitution and when they are confronted with each other, a sense of injustice generates an obvious
language insecurity, set off at various individual and community levels. It is reflected in attitudes,
forceful words, or sometimes a lack of words thereof, to express how standard language doubles not as
"we", but as "them". Considering accents is also a significant means of indicating insecurity at a more
personal scale. It can embarrasss our speakers to the point that some avoid the high language as much
as possible. These attitudes and representations, even if they are also to a certain extent, an expression
of patriotism, testify to a mistrust of such a similar Other, and an intense desire to differentiate from it.
Militant use of the Swiss German dialect thus seems consecutive to the language policy of the
Confederation. The process of reclaiming representations linked to standard language if already
initiated, has not yet reached completeness since it isn’t considered to be either a completely foreign
body or a completely Swiss one.
With regards to learning and teaching, exclusive use of the standard language in the first two
years of school as experienced by our young participants, did not appear to show negative
representations likely to cause any language insecurity. Harmful representations and discriminating
prosodic characteristics found in adult speech did not emerge in the speech of children we interviewed.
In addition, free time play in the standard language is substantial for these kids, which we see as an
48
encouraging sign leading towards a well lived plurilingualism. Causes for insecurity in adulthood
therefore lie elsewhere. But it could also be argued that our data gathering method did not allow for
their emergence and that a different approach would have been necessary. An optimist might see in this
situation an indication of a reversal in the situation adults currently live in, which would allow childrens’
positive representations of bilingualism to remain through adulthood. I personally consider this
interpretation as unlikely, given the intensity of the language related representations in the region. It
would be relevant to identify the age group where the phenomena set in and whether some strata of
society are affected differently than others, which could give us some clues as to the possible triggers
of linguistic insecurity in Switzerland.
Language insecurity can never be desirable, but neither is it fatal. The trend can be altered to
build a more equitable reality. To me, those are two-fold: on the one hand, legitimizing the use of dialect
in the school environment, and on the other hand, normalizing the Swiss prosody in standard language.
Granting the dialect more weight in education to let it earn a certain status should limit inter-language
frictions and improve the images related to each variety. In addition, a more systematic use of
comparative tools and contrastive educational materials should contribute to enhance the Swiss prosody
and thereby to correct representations related to specific Swiss prosody, since the devaluation of the
Swiss accent seems to be the heart of the issue.
49
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Bickel, H., Landolt, C., & Schweizerischer Verein für die deutsche Sprache, Schweizerischer. (2012).
Duden, Schweizerhochdeutsch Wörterbuch der Standardsprache in der deutschen Schweiz. Mannheim:
Dudenverl.
Biichlé, L. (2011). Insécurité linguistique et réseaux sociaux denses ou isolants : le cas de femmes
maghrébines dans la tourmente. Lidil [En ligne], 44.
Billiez, J., & Millet, A. (2001). Représentations sociales: trajets théoriques et méthodologiques. Les
représentations des langues et de leur apprentissage. Références, modèles, données et méthodes, 31-
49.
Blanchet, P. (2013). Repères terminologiques et conceptuels pour identifier les discriminations

linguistiques. Cahiers Internationaux De Sociolinguistique, 4, 2, 29-39.
Brohy, C. (2013). Plurilinguisme, diglossie et minorités : le cas de la Suisse. Lengas [En ligne]. 163.
Bürki, T. (2009). DurCHstarten: Geschichten von Jugendlichen, die in die Schweiz eingewandert sind:
Lesebuch für das 5. bis 8. Schuljahr. Solothurn: Lehrmittelverlag Solothurn.
Christen, H. (2008). Gesprochene Standardsprache im Deutschschweizer Alltag. Rapport final du

Programme National De Recherche NPR 56.
Coracini, M. J. R. F. (2006). L'espace hybride de la subjectivité: le (bien)-être entre les langues.

Langage et Société, 117, 41-62.
Cottier, B. et Gossin, B. (2014). Vers un statut juridique du suisse-allemand ? sui-generis, 1-14.
Dabène, L. (1994). Repères sociolinguistiques pour l’enseignement des langues. Paris : Hachette.
Deprez, C. (1994). Les enfants bilingues: Langues et familles. Paris: Didier.
Flubacher, M. (2013). Language(s) as the key to integration? The ideological role of diglossia in the
German-speaking region of Switzerland. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang GmbH.
Giles, H., Bourhis, R. Y., & Taylor, D. M. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic group
relations. Language, Ethnicity and Intergroup Relations, Londres : Academic Press.
Goffin, C., & Blondin, C. (2009). Les langues des voisins: des langues toujours appréciées ? Lidil
(France), 40, 17-30.
Jodelet, D. (1997). Les représentations sociales. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
50
Lüdi, G., Werlen, I., Colombo, S., Werlen, I., Schweiz., & Transit TXT. (2005). Le paysage linguistique
en Suisse. Neuchâtel: Diff.
Lüdi, G., Py, B., & Pietro, J.-F. (1995). Changement de langage et langage du changement: Aspects
linguistiques de la migration interne en Suisse. Lausanne: Editions L'Age d'homme.
Matthey, M. (1997). Contacts des langues et représentations. Neuchâtel: Institut de linguistique de

l'Université.
Perregaux, C. (2002). (Auto)biographies langagières en formation et à l’école : pour une autre

compréhension du rapport aux langues. Bulletin VALS-ASLA, 76, 81-94.
De, Pietro, J.-F. & Muller, N. (1997). La construction de l'image de l'autre dans l'interaction: Des
coulisses de l'implicite à la mise en scène. Bulletin Suisse De Linguistique Appliquée, 65.
Py, B. (2010). Pour une approche linguistique des représentations sociales. Langages, 2004, 154, 6-19.
Schläpfer, R. (1985). La Suisse aux quatre langues. Genève: Zoé.
Widmer, J. (2004). Langues nationales et identités collectives: L'exemple de la Suisse. Paris:

L'Harmattan.
Applied Linguistics. Consulté le 27 juin 2016, https://www.zhaw.ch/en/linguistics/.
Bibliothek und Rezensionen - Albrecht von Haller. Consulté le 28 juin 28, 2016, http://www.albrecht-
von-haller.ch/d/bibliothekundrezensionen.php.
Blanchet, P. (2013). Repères terminologiques et conceptuels pour identifier les discriminations

linguistiques. Consulté le 28 juin 2016,
http://www.cairn.info/article_p.php?ID_ARTICLE=CISL_1302_0029.
Das Chochichästli-Orakel. Consuté le 04 juillet, 2016, http://dialects.from.ch/.
Dialekt & Mundart. Consuté le 12 juillet 2016, http://www.buchplanet.ch/ki/Dialekt-Mundart-87.html.
Forschungsdatenbank. Consulté le 27 juin 2016, http://www.research-projects.uzh.ch/p21865.htm

27.6.16.
Hoi zme Schweizerdeutsch leicht gemacht - Bergli Books, an imprint of Schwabe AG. Consulté le12
juillet 2016, http://www.bergli.ch/products-24-3/hoi_zaeme_-_schweizerdeutsch_leicht_gemacht.
Le Conseil fédéral, Le portail du Gouvernement suisse. Consulté le 9 juillet 2016,

https://www.admin.ch/opc/fr/classified-compilation/19995395/index.html.
51
Programme national de recherche, NFP 56 - F. Consulté le 3 juillet 2016,
http://www.nfp56.ch/f.cfm?Slanguag.
Plateau. Consulté le 27 juillet 2016,

https://www.eda.admin.ch/aboutswitzerland/fr/home/umwelt/geografie/mittelland.html.
Py, B. (2014). Pour une approche linguistique des représentations sociales. Consulté le 15 mai 2016,
http://www.cairn.info/revue-langages-2004-2-page-6.htm.
Schweizerisches Idiotikon. Consuté le 04 juillet, 2016,

https://www.idiotikon.ch/index.php?option=com_content.
Zeitschrift für Sprache in der deutschen Schweiz, SchweizerDeutsch (2/2009). Consulté le 12 juillet
2016, http://zeitschriftschweizerdeutsch.ch/img/files/SchweizerDeutsch%2009_2%20Internet.pdf.
52
ANNEX 1
Schéma de l’insécurité linguistique
Luc Biichlé (2011)
Monolinguisme (bi)plurilinguisme Monolinguisme

en langue d’origine en français
◄---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-►
Ségrégation / marginalisation Intégration Assimilation
INSECURITE linguistique forte INSECURITE linguistique moindre ou absente
53
ANNEX 2
Swatch Group Gschäftsbricht 2012, Biel / Bienne – Bulletin / rapport annuel
54
55
56
ANNEX 3
Recensement fédéral de la population 2000
LE PAYSAGE LINGUISTIQUE EN SUISSE, p 30
GEORGES LÜDI, IWAR WERLEN
57
ANNEX 4
LE PAYSAGE LINGUISTIQUE EN SUISSE, p. 49
58
ANNEX 5
LE PAYSAGE LINGUISTIQUE EN SUISSE, p 116
59
View publication stats

The Dominanceofthe Swiss German Dialect

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Dominanceofthe Swiss German Dialect

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

The dominance of the Swiss German Dialect in the German part of

Thesis · June 2017

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

THE NON-IDENTIFICATION TO ONE OF THE NATIONAL LANGUAGES,

Language Studies Department

Under the direction of STĒPHANIE GALLIGANI

THE NON-IDENTIFICATION TO ONE OF THE NATIONAL LANGUAGES,

Language Studies Department

Under the direction of STĒPHANIE GALLIGANI

To Andrea, for information loaded moments.

PART 1: THEORETICAL FRAME ................................................................................. 12

CHAPTRE 2. OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY ..................16

CHAPTER 3. LANGUAGES & SETTINGS IN GERMAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND ..... 19

CHAPTER 4. THE SWISS: PLURILINGUAL AGAINST THEIR WILL .................................22

PART 2: METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE ................................................................... 26

CHAPTER 7. A DAZ TEACHER .................................................................................................30

PART 3: DATA ANALYSIS ............................................................................................. 32

CHAPTER 9. ...AND THE OTHER .............................................................................................40

CHAPTER 10. IN CONTACT WITH SWISS GERMAN PEOPLE ...........................................45

Nationalities, religions, if not ‘races’ are superior to others,

But we remain convinced that there are languages and

Manners of writing and speaking languages

That are superior to others.

Two observations are behind this reflection:

A foreign language, as opposed to the mother tongue in plurilingual context, nevertheless

C. STANDARD LANGUAGE AND HIGH GERMAN:

CHAPTER 2. OFFICIAL LANGUAGES AND ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY

A. OFFICIAL AND NATIONAL LANGUAGES IN SWITZERLAND

B. AN EVOLVING ETHNOLINGUISTIC VITALITY

1. The vitality of parlances:

4. An attempt to control the dialect and a refusal of recognition:

CHAPTER 3. LANGUAGES & SETTINGS IN GERMAN-SPEAKING SWITZERLAND

A. FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGE DISTRIBUTION

1. The spoken format:

2. The written format:

The rise of English to a standing close to that of an official language in German-speaking

B. TEACHING HIGH GERMAN

To follow Dabène’s recommendations (1994, p. 137), a successful education relies on both

CHAPTER 4. THE SWISS PEOPLE: UNWILLINGLY PLURILINGUAL?

To build upon two commonly accepted postulates:

“Swiss German is the language of social interaction” and

“Standard German is the writing language, and that of formal exchange,”

B. SWISS STANDARD GERMAN:

C. AMBIGUOUS CONTACTS WITH THE GERMAN PEOPLE AND THEIR

4. About the norm:

CHAPTER 5. SWISS GERMANS OF SWISS GERMAN PARENTS

CHAPTER 6. TWO GROUPS OF CHILDREN

CHAPTER 7. A DAZ TEACHER

To better understand how the linguistic policy in German-speaking Switzerland is being

B. IMPLEMENTATION AND PROGRESSION

CHAPTER 8. THE IDENTICAL...

A. LANGUAGE OF THE ROOTS, LANGUAGE OF INTERACTION

Q. What are your languages?

B. REGIONAL AND NATIONAL IDENTITIES

Q. It is a national language... Isn’t it, high German ?

C. THE SWISS TOTEM:

Q. German, is it a mother tongue for you, good German?

D. LANGUAGE CONSERVATION CONCERNS

CHAPTER 9. ...AND THE OTHER

A. BETWEEN NATIONAL LANGUAGE AND FOREIGN LANGUAGE

Q. Do you sometimes speak German then? I mean, outside of school.

Annex Swiss Intonation in standard language German Intonation