ドイツ語史においてドイツ語圏南東部のバイエルン・オーストリア方言圏は、文章語の標準化が最も遅かった地域であり、18世紀中葉に標準的な東中部ドイツ語文章語に切り替わっていく。本研究では、この時代のこの地域の音楽家の書簡を言語資料として、書簡の書き手と受け手の社会階層、教養の程度、親疎関係等に応じて、前置詞の格支配について標準形と非標準形がどのように使い分けられたのかを分析し、標準化のプロセスを明らかにすることを目的とした。今回の研究結果を蓄積してきた研究成果とつきあわせ、修正・補足した研究内容をドイツの出版社から公刊した。
まずは自身が作成した「散文コーパス1520-1870年」（総語数約2,900万語）をもとに4つの前置詞の格支配について歴史的・通時的調査を進めた。その結果、von wegenのvon、anstattのanが脱落し、文法化していくにつれて与格支配が増加していること、wegen, während, stattの与格支配は中部・北部ドイツよりも上部ドイツにおいて頻度が高いこと、さらに1800年を境にwegenとwährendの与格支配が激減していることが明らかになった（2-3章）。第4章ではモーツァルト、ベートーヴェンの書簡、およびベートーヴェンの筆談帳を調査し、会話の場面や会話者同士の人間関係などと関連づけながら言語意識を抽出した。さらに第5章では戯曲（18・19世紀）における台詞部分を分析対象とし、話し手の社会階級と話し手同士の親疎関係によって前置詞の格支配が使い分けられていたという仮説を導き出すことができた。第6章では16世紀以降の文法書、辞書におけるメタ言語的言説を収集し、言語使用史（実証的な用例調査）とメタ言語言語史の両面から、標準形と非標準形に関わる言語意識史を再構成することを試みた。19世紀に入って確認された劇的な変化（与格支配の減少）の原因として、wegenの格支配は「属格が正しく与格は誤り」とした文法家アーデルングによる文法規範（1781年）が学校教育を通じて文章語の書き手たちの言語意識に大きな影響を与えたことが想定される。つまり、前置詞の格支配の歴史は、文法化という「下からの言語変化」と、文法家による言語規範化という「上からの言語変化」という二つのプロセスの相克が見て取れる興味深い事例であると言える。
Language variation forms a starting point for language change. The case government of the prepositions wegen ('because of'), statt ('instead of'), während ('during'), and trotz ('in spite of') varies between genitive and dative. This thesis aims at describing and explaining the process of the language change concerning these prepositions. For a precise representation of the developments, my research is based on a quantitative and statistical analysis of large historical language corpora diversified according to types of text.
After preliminary theoretical considerations as well as an explanation of the research object and aims, my analysis begins in chapters 2 and 3 with a representation of the developments of these four prepositions on the basis of "Corpus 1520–1870 (Various Text Genres)", "Corpus of 18th Century Literary Language", and "Newspaper Corpus 1750–1850". The analysis shows – in chronological sequence – the diminution of the prefixing of von with wegen and of an with statt, the increase of dative government (with wegen as well as während), and the consolidation of genitive case marking in language usage (except trotz). The frequency of the dative with wegen, statt, and, während is significantly higher in Upper German texts than in Middle and North German texts. The case government of trotz is much more diverse.
In chapter 4, based on private letters of Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven, and C. Ph. E. Bach, and of Goethe, as well as on the conversation notebooks of Beethoven, conceptionally oral communication ('language of immediacy') is examined from a sociopragmatic perspective. Here, the closeness to the communication partner seems to correlate with the use of the dative case, whereas the postpositional variant (genitive + wegen) can be regarded as belonging to the 'language of distance'. The norm of usage in Upper German texts proves to be the dative, whereas in Middle and North German it is the genitive case.
In chapter 5, the fictitious 'language of immediacy' in drama texts from 1750 to 1850 is analyzed in light of the politeness theory. The analysis shows that the factor 'Power' primarily regulates the sociopragmatic functions of the case selected with wegen: The use of genitive is associated with respect, conduct, a high educational level, and social distance, the use of dative with familiarity and a low educational level.
Chapter 6 examines the metalinguistic evaluations of the prepositional variants in grammars and dictionaries of the time. The use of the genitive is consistently judged positively. On the other hand, – in spite of its widespread use in the 18th century – the use of the dative with wegen, (an)statt, and während is stigmatized as an Upper German 'mistake' by grammarians and lexicographers oriented to the East Central German prestige norm, whose main representative was Adelung. The longer form anstatt is mentioned in all grammars and dictionaries until 1870, although it appears to be out of use in the 19th century, according to my empirical data. Both the genitive and the dative are permitted for trotz by 19th century codifiers, which is in full agreement with my usage data.
Chapter 7 discusses the relationship between language variation and change in the history of the four prepositions. The increase of dative government in written texts seems to reflect a language change 'from below' before the appearance of Adelung's grammar: The use of the dative occurs in texts representing 'language of immediacy' first. The conventions developed over a long span of language usage are however overlaid by normative prescriptions 'from above' in the course of grammatical codifications. Consequently, the history of prepositional case government investigated in this study is an interesting case of language change both 'from below' and 'from above'.