The grammar of Swiss dialects has some idiosyncratic features in comparison to Standard German: • There is no
preterite indicative (yet there is a
preterite subjunctive). • The
preterite is replaced by perfect constructs (this also happens in spoken Standard German, particularly in Southern Germany and Austria). • It is still possible to form
pluperfect phrases, by applying the perfect construct twice to the same sentence. • There is no
genitive case, though certain dialects have preserved a
possessive genitive (for instance in rural
Bernese German). The
genitive case is replaced by two constructions: The first of these is often acceptable in Standard German as well: possession + Prp. (Std. German ) + possessor: vs. Standard German ('a book of a professor'), vs. Standard German ('the professor's book'). The second is still frowned on where it appears in Standard German (from dialects and spoken language): dative of the possessor + the possessive pronoun referring to the possessor + possession: ('the professor his book'). • The order within verb groups may vary, e.g. vs. Standard German 'when you have come/came'. In fact, dependencies can be arbitrarily
cross-serial, making Swiss German one of the few known non-
context-free natural languages. • All
relative clauses are introduced by the
relative particle ('where'), never by the
relative pronouns as in Standard German, e.g. vs. Standard German ('the example that she writes'); vs. Standard German ('the example that she thinks of'). Whereas the relative particle replaces the Standard German relative pronouns in the Nom. (subject) and Acc. (direct object) without further complications, in phrases where plays the role of an indirect object, a prepositional object, a possessor or an adverbial adjunct it has to be taken up later in the relative clause by reference of (prp. +) the
personal pronoun (if '
refers to a person) or the pronominal adverb (if ' refers to a thing). E.g. ('the professor whose book I showed you'), ('the mountain that we were upon'). This is the case for the motion verbs 'to go' and 'to come' when used in the meaning of 'go (to) do something', 'come (to) do something', as well as the verbs 'to let' and in certain dialects 'to start, to begin' when used in the meaning of 'let do something', or 'start doing something'. Most affected by this phenomenon is the verb , followed by '
. Both ' and '''' are less affected and only when used in
present tense declarative main clauses. Declarative sentence examples: As the examples show, all verbs are reduplicated with a reduced infinitival form when used in a declarative main clause. This is especially interesting as it stands in contrast to the standard variety of German and other varieties of the same, where such doubling effects are not found as outlined in the examples.
: weakest doubling effects Reduplication effects are weaker in the verbs 'to let' and 'to start, to begin' than they are in 'to go' and 'to come'. This means that ''
is most likely to be used without its reduplicated and reduced form while retaining grammaticality, whereas utterances with goo'' are least likely to remain grammatical without the reduplicated part. Between '
and ', these effects are weakest in '
. This means that while reduplication is mandatory for ' in declarative main clauses almost everywhere in the country, this is the case for fewer varieties of Swiss German with ''
. The reason for this is unknown, but it has been hypothesized that the fact that afaa
has a separable prefix (a''-) might weaken its doubling capacity.
and : stronger reduplication Ungrammaticality in reduplication of 'to start, to begin' in the past tense and in subordinate clauses as well as the somewhat more lenient use of reduplication with '''' 'to let' stand in contrast to doubling effects of the motion verbs '''' 'to go' and 'to come'. When the latter two verbs are used in other utterances other than a declarative main clause, where the finite verb traditionally is in second position, their use might not be mandatory; however, it is correct and grammatical to double them both in the past tense and in subordinate clauses: Past tense example with and : {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 As outlined in both examples, the reduplicated form of both and can but does not have to be used in order for the past tense sentences to be grammatical.Notably, it is the reduced form of both verbs that is necessary, not the full
participle form. Subordinate clause examples for and : {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 In subordinate clauses, the reduplicated part is needed as the sentence would otherwise be ungrammatical in both '
and '. The same is true for the past tense. Since there is only one past tense in Swiss German and since this is formed using an auxiliary verb – 'to be' or 'to have', depending on the main verb – reduplication seems to be affected and therefore, less strictly enforced for '
and ', while it is completely ungrammatical for and optional for respectively.
Questions Questions behave a lot like their declarative counterparts, and reduplication is therefore mandatory for both motion verbs '''' 'to go' and '''' 'to come', while '''' 'to let' and '''' 'to start, to begin' show weaker doubling effects and more optionality. Furthermore, this is the case for both open and close (yes/no) questions. Consider the following examples: in open and close questions: {{interlinear |indent=2 {{interlinear |indent=2 Just like in declarative forms, could be reduced to
a- and thus be considered the detachable prefix. In this case, '
would no longer be a reduplicated verb, and that is where the language development seems to move towards. The examples below outline ' reduplicated with both its reduced form '
and the reduced form of ', '''', in different sentence forms. Declarative main clause, present tense {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 Declarative main clause past tense {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 Subordinate clause {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2 Imperative mood {{interlinear |lang=gsw |indent=2
Multiple reduplication with and With the motion verbs 'to go' and 'to come', where reduplication effects are strongest, there is some variation regarding their reduplicated or reduced forms. Thus, in some Swiss German dialects, '
will be doubled as , while will be doubled as . In some analyses, this is described as a multiple reduplication phenomenon in that the reduced infinitives or part is repeated as , providing the forms ' and ''''. However, these forms are used less frequently than their shorter counterparts and seem to be concentrated into a small geographic area of Switzerland. == Vocabulary ==