The principal formal characteristics of the new common language were as follows: (1) The diphthongs uo, iie, and ie of the Middle High German are regularly contracted into a, ii, and i (the latter continuing, however, to be ie) : guot, guete, liebe became gat, fate, Jibe (spelt liebe). This change was orig inally a Middle German characteristic.
(2) The long vowels I, a, and a (spelt in) of the Middle High German are regularly diph thongized into ai (written ei), an and of (spelt eu): min and has became main (spelt mein) and haus (the English mine and house have gone through similar changes), and hiite (spelt hiute) became hoite (spelt heute). This change was originally a Bavarian-Austrian charac teristic.
(3) The diphthongs ei and ou are regularly changed to ai (continuing, however, to be spelt ei) and au: kein and bourn became kain (spelt kein) and Baum. This was also first a Bavar ian-Austrian characteristic.
(4) In the combinations sl, sm-, sit-, sw-, sP-, st-, the initial sound has regularly changed to the sound represented now by sch, though in the last two combinations s continues to be writ ten: Middle High German slange, smelten, sniden, stvimmen, sprechen, sterne appear as schlange, schmelzen, schneiden, schtommen, schprechen (written sprechen), schtern (writ ten stern).
(5) A later change, which came about dur ing the period itself, consists in the lengthening of most short stem vowels in open syllables; by analogy many in closed syllables have fol lowed suit. New High German sd-gen, fah-ren, nih-men, Vater, Wig, etc., had originally short stem vowels. On the other hand many originally long vowels and diphthongs followed by more than one consonant have been short ened, hence, brachte, Mutter, Jammer.
(6) By the end of the 17th century the old differences between the stem vowels of the preterit singular and preterit plural of strong verbs had been wiped out: sang-sungen had become sang-sangen; the only exception re maining is ward-wurden.
(7) The influence of Latin exercised through the traditions of the chancery language on the one hand, and through the clerical and human istic training of Luther and his followers on the other, resulted in a cumbersome and greatly involved sentence structure, from which Luther's style in his most popular works, not ably his translation of the Bible, is happily free, but which in the writings of others, notably in more or less technical works, has been carried to such excess that it has seriously interfered with the acquisition and spread of the German language among foreigners. and
only in modern times has the style of the best writers become reasonably free from this de fect. The influence of Latin showed itself further in the vocabulary, not only in the bor rowing of Latin terms, but also, as in the first period, in the coining of German compounds on Latin models. During the 17th century, chiefly as a result of the Thirty Years' War. the lan guage became so corrupt with Latin and French words that it was scarcely recognizable. A re action, however, set in, societies were formed by scholars, writers, and patrons of letters for the purification and refinement of the language, and these conscious efforts for improvement have continued with more or less persistence to the present time, so that the language of the best writers of our day is freer from unneces sary foreign words than that of Lessing, Goethe, and Schiller. Indeed Modern German is, espe cially compared with English, a very homo geneous language, which shows itself not only in the small number of foreign words, but also in the thoroughness with which most of these have been naturalized in pronuhciation and in flection.
In spite of the great influence of Luther and other favorable circumstances it must not be supposed that the introduction of the new literary language did not meet with more or less conscious and unconscious resistance. The south was slower than the north to accept it; being largely Catholic, it looked askance at the "Lutheran" language. The political independ ence of the Swiss made them ambitious to raise their native Alemannian to the position of a literary language. Not until the middle of the 18th century had all resistance practically ceased, and the German-speaking countries pos sessed and were conscious of possessing a common literary language. The provincial char acteristics which still remain, especially in Austria and Switzerland, are slight in compari son with the unity that has been attained. Moreover the common language has not only supplanted the dialects in literature, govern ment, school, and church, but also in the or dinary intercourse at least of the educated; on the other hand it is still constantly drawing upon the dialects to replenish and rejuvenate its stock of words.