Slavistik/Slawistik as shibboleth

[Loren A. BILLINGS]

Bjoern Wiemer wrote the following:

>Whoever answered my letter thank you. But I don't understand by a
>"functionalized distinction" between 'SlaVistik' and 'SlaWistik'. There are,
>to my knowledge, no differences on the content level of the way you spell
>the word in German. It is rather a matter of tradition and, consequently,
>lazyness. I am from the Western part of Germany and would write only
>SlaVistik (as you say); but this use is also strengthened by the fact that
>when translitering Cyrillic characters into Latin ones, V is used, not W.

Before that, I had written he following:

>>In the German-speaking world, there is an (albeit orthographic) distinction
>>between _Slawistik_ (roughly speaking, in Austria and East Germany) and
>>_Slavistik_ (used elsewhere).  Predictably, this distinction has become
>>functionalized.  With German unification, some places, such as my own
>>current affiliation (for two more days) in the former East Germany, use
>>_Slavistik_; I've heard of some places where the institute's name is
>>spelled one way while the name of a publication there is spelled the other
>>way.

I agree that there is complete homophony between the two spellings.  The
distinction between _Slavic_ and _Slavonic_ in English is more real
linguistically.  Still, the choice between _Slavistik_ and _Slawistik_
(specifically in the _Neue L"ande_) functions as a shibboleth of sorts, in
the sense that the writer is inevitably identified with a particular camp
by his/her choice.  That's all I wished to point out.

Happy new year!  --Loren Billings