Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T20:35:50.735Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pronominal Gender in Spoken Dutch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

Jenny Audring
Jenny Audring
Affiliation:
Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper discusses the problem of gender agreement in Dutch, arising from the loss of gender markers and resulting in different gender values for nouns and pronouns. On the basis of corpus data from spontaneous speech, the study shows that Dutch pronominal gender is undergoing a functional reinterpretation according to the degree of individuation of the referent. In addition to the antecedent's lexical gender, this conceptual property governs the agreement behavior of personal, possessive, and relative pronouns. Special attention is given to the competition between semantic and syntactic gender agreement and to parallel phenomena in other Germanic languages.Many thanks to Geert Booij, Grev Corbett, Edith Moravcsik, Monika Schmid, Hans Olav Enger, Caroline Sandström, Pieter van Reenen, Frans Hinskens, Florian Haas, and two anonymous referees for comments on versions of this article, to Andrew Spencer for discussion, and to my colleagues at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam for additional data. The usual disclaimers apply.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 18 , Issue 2 , June 2006 , pp. 85 - 116
Copyright
© 2006 Society for Germanic Linguistics

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

E-ANS, Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst, electronic resource, http://oase.uci.kun.nl/~ans/.
Barlow Michael. 1992 A situated theory of agreement. New York: Garland.
Corbett Greville G. 1979. The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15. 203– 224.Google Scholar
Corbett Greville G. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Corbett Greville G. To appear. Agreement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Croft William. 2001. Radical construction grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dahl Östen. 2000a. Animacy and the notion of semantic gender. Gender in grammar and cognition, ed. by Barbara Unterbeck and Matti Rissanen, 99– 115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Dekeyser Xavier. 1980. The diachrony of the gender systems in English and Dutch. Historical morphology, ed. by Jacek Fisiak, 97– 111. The Hague: Mouton.
de Vries Jelle. 2001. Onze Nederlandse spreektaal. Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers.
Enger Hans-Olav. 2004. Scandinavian pancake-sentences as semantic agreement. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 27. 5– 34.Google Scholar
Fletcher William H. 1987. Semantic factors in Dutch gender choice. Papers from the second interdisciplinary conference on Netherlandic studies, ed. by William H. Fletcher, 51– 63. Lanham, NY: University Press of America.
Geeraerts Dirk. 1992. Pronominale-Masculiniserings-Parameters in Vlaanderen. De binnenbouw van het Nederlands: Een bundel artikelen voor Piet Paardekooper, ed. by Hans Bennis and Jan W. de Vries, 73– 84. Dordrecht: ICG Publications.
Geerts Guido. 1995a. Genusfouten: Hollanditis in Vlaanderen? Nederlands, een en veelzijdig–Festschrift voor Guido Geerts, ed. by Guido Geerts, 67– 76. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.
Geerts Guido. 1995b. Hij geeft melk. Nederlands, een en veelzijdig–Festschrift voor Guido Geerts, ed. by Guido Geerts, 43– 52. Leuven: Universitaire Pers.
Givón Talmy. 1979. On understanding grammar. New York: Academic Press.
Haspelmath Martin. 2001. Indefinite pronouns. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Haspelmath Martin. 2004. Coordinating constructions: An overview. Coordinating constructions, ed. by Martin Haspelmath, 3– 39. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Josefsson Gunlög. In press. Semantic and grammatical genders in Swedish– independent but interacting dimensions. Lingua.
Kuno Susumu. 1987. Functional syntax. Anaphora, discourse, and empathy. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Kruisinga E. 1924. A grammar of modern Dutch. London: Allen and Unwin.
Lehmann Christian. 1998. Possession in Yucatec Maya. Structures, functions, typology. Unterschleissheim: LINCOM.
Maljaars Abraham. 1979. Bijdrage tot de kennis van genus en geslacht in de achttiende eeuw met een uitwijding over de pronominale aanduiding in het moderne Nederlands. Utrecht: Instituut De Vooys.
Matasović Ranko. 2004. Gender in Indo-European. Heidelberg: Winter Verlag.
Ponelis Fritz. 1979. Afrikaanse sintaksis. Pretoria: van Schaik.
Priestly Tom M.S. 1983. On ‘drift’ in Indo-European gender systems. Journal of Indo-European Studies 11. 339– 363.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg Günter. 2004a. Comparing grammatical variation phenomena in non-standard English and Low German dialects from a typological perspective. Dialectology meets typology. Dialect grammar from a crosslinguistic perspective, ed. by Bernd Kortmann, 335– 363. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rohdenburg Günter. 2004b. Grammatische Parallelen zwischen niederdeutschen Mundarten und Nichtstandardvarietäten im Englischen aus typologischer Sicht. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 127. 85– 122.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg Günter. 2006. Variable plural marking with measure nouns in non-standard English and Low German varieties. North-Western European Language Evolution (NOWELE) 48. 111– 130.Google Scholar
Romijn Kirsten. 1996. Hoe doen we het? Verwijzen naar linguïstische en cognitieve representaties met het voornaamwoord “het”. Amsterdam: Publicaties van het P.J. Meertens-Instituut.
Sasse Hans-Jürgen. 1993. Syntactic categories and subcategories. Syntax. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung (An international handbook of contemporary research), ed. by Joachim Jacobs, Arnim von Stechow, Wolfgang Sternefeld, and Theo Vennemann, 646– 686. Berlin: de Gruyter.
Siemund Peter. 2002a. Animate pronouns for inanimate objects: Pronominal gender in English regional varieties. Anglistentag 2001 Wien, ed. by Dieter Kastovsky, Gunther Kaltenböck, and Susanne Reichl, 19– 34. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier.
Siemund Peter. 2002b. Mass versus count. Pronominal gender in regional varieties of Germanic languages. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 55. 213– 233.Google Scholar
Siemund Peter. Forthcoming. Pronominal gender in English—A study of English varieties from a crosslinguistic perspective. London: Routledge.
Silverstein Michael. 1976. Hierarchy of features and ergativity. Grammatical categories in Australian languages, ed. by Richard Dixon, 112– 171. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Steele Susan. 1978. Word order variation: A typological study. Universals of human language, vol. 4: Syntax, ed. by Joseph H. Greenberg, Charles A. Ferguson, and Edith A. Moravcsik, 585– 623. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
van Haeringen Commissie B. 1936. Geslacht, verbuiging, voornaamwoordelijke aanduiding: Rapport uitgebracht aan zijne Excellentie den Minister van Onderwijs, Kunsten en Wetenschappen door de Nederlandsch-Belgische commissie tot samenstelling van een woordenligst.'s Gravenhage: van Goor Zonen.
van Haeringen C. B. 1951. Genusveranderingen bij stofnamen. De Nieuwe Taalgids 44. 7–14.Google Scholar
Verhoeven P. R. F. 1990. Voornaamwoordelijke aanduiding in het hedendaagse Nederlands. De Nieuwe Taalgids 83. 494– 513.Google Scholar
Wahrig-Burfeind Renate. 1989. Nominales und pronominales Genus im südlichen Nordseegebiet. Eine areallinguistische Untersuchung. München: tuduv.
Wurzel Wolfgang U. 1986. Die wiederholte Klassifikation von Substantiven. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikation 39. 76– 96.Google Scholar