Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T06:02:04.905Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Is Standard Dutch with a regional accent standard or not? Evidence from native speakers' attitudes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 November 2010

Stefan Grondelaers  and
Roeland van Hout
Stefan Grondelaers
Affiliation:
Radboud University of Nijmegen
Roeland van Hout
Affiliation:
Radboud University of Nijmegen
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper reports a speaker evaluation experiment that investigated the competition between three regional accents of Standard Dutch and references to the speaker's profession as determinants of attitude formation. A stratified sample of listener-judges rated speech stimuli that were presented in two guises, a neutral guise and a teacher guise (the latter containing multiple references that revealed the speaker to be a high school teacher of Dutch). The experimental findings corroborate our earlier claim that regional flavoring is embedded in lay conceptualizations of Standard Dutch. Although teachers of Dutch may be the last “gatekeepers” of the standard in the Low Countries, they are not automatically downgraded when they have a regional accent: What matters is, clearly, which accent they have. Analysis of the ratings further suggests a hierarchical relation between accent and occupation as perception triggers: Even though regional accent clearly is the stronger attitude determinant, it does not suppress occupational information but interacts with it to generate richer social meaning.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , July 2010 , pp. 221 - 239
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

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

REFERENCES

Abrams, Dominic, & Hogg, Michael A. (1987). Language attitudes, frames of reference, and social identity: A Scottish dimension. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 6:201–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adank, Patti, Van Hout, Roeland, & Van de Velde, Hans. (2007). An acoustic description of the vowels of Northern and Southern Standard Dutch II: Regional varieties. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 121:1130–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bennis, Hans. (2003). Hoeveel talen telt het Nederlands? Over taalvariatie en taalbeleid. In Stroop, J. (ed.), Waar gaat het Nederlands naartoe? Panorama van een taal. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker. 25–34.Google Scholar
Brewer, Marilynn B. (1996). When stereotypes lead to stereotyping: The use of stereotypes in person perception. In Macrae, C. N., Stangor, C., & Hewstone, M. (eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press. 254–275.Google Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. (2007). Accent, (ing), and the social logic of listener perceptions. American Speech 82:32–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. (2009). The nature of sociolinguistic perception. Language Variation and Change 21:135–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cargile, Aaron C. (2002). Speaker evaluation measures of language attitudes: Evidence of information processing effects. Language Awareness 11:178–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham-Andersson, Una, & Engstrand, Olle. (1989). Perceived strength and identity of foreign accent in Swedish. Phonetica 46:138–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crystal, David. (1994). Which English—or English which? In Hayhoe, M. & Parker, S. (eds.), Who owns English?. Berkshire, UK: Open University Press. 108–114.Google Scholar
De Schutter, Georges. (1980). Norm en normgevoelens bij Nederlandstaligen in België. De Nieuwe Taalgids 73:93–109.Google Scholar
Deumert, Ana, & Vandenbussche, Wim. (2003). Standard languages. Taxonomies and histories. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W. (eds.), Germanic standardization: past to present. Impact: Studies in Language and Society 18. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vries, Jan W. (1987). De standaardtaal in Nederland. In de Rooij, J. (ed.), Variatie en norm in de Standaardtaal. Amsterdam: Meertensinstituut. 143–164.Google Scholar
Doeleman, Rianne. (1998). Native reactions to nonnative Speech. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Eckert, Penelope. (2008). Variation and the indexical field. Journal of Sociolinguistics 12(4):453–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Peter. (2005). Attitude measurements. In Ammon, U., Dittmar, N., Mattheier, K. J., & Trudgill, P. (eds.), Sociolinguistics. An international handbook of the science of language and society. Vol. 2. Berlin: De Gruyter. 1251–1260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garrett, Peter, Coupland, Nikolas, & Williams, Ann. (2003). Investigating language attitudes: Social meanings of dialect, ethnicity and performance. Cardiff: University of Wales Press.Google Scholar
Geerts, Guido, Haeseryn, Walter, De Rooij, Jaap, & van den Toorn, Maarten C.. (1984). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen/Leuven: Wolters-Noordhoff.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, Grondelaers, Stefan, & Speelman, Dirk. (1999). Convergentie en divergentie in de Nederlandse woordenschat. Een onderzoek naar kleding- en voetbaltermen. Amsterdam: Meertensinstituut.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, & Van Hout, Roeland. (forthcoming). The standard language situation in the Low Countries: Top-down and bottom-up variations on a diaglossic theme. Journal of Germanic Linguistics.Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, Van Hout, Roeland, & Steegs, Mieke. (2010). Evaluating regional accent variation in Standard Dutch. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29:101–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haeseryn, Walter, Romijn, Kirsten, Geerts, Guido, De Rooij, Jaap, & van den Toorn, Maarten C.. (1997 2). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen and Deurne: Martinus Nijhoff – Wolters Plantyn.Google Scholar
Haugen, Einar. (1966). Language conflict and language planning: The case of Modern Norwegian. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heijmer, Tessa, & Vonk, Roos. (2002). Effecten van een regionaal accent op de beoordeling van de spreker. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie 57:108–113.Google Scholar
Jacobi, Irene. (2008). On variation and change in diphthongs and long vowels of spoken Dutch. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kloeke, Gesinus G. (1951). Gezag en norm bij het gebruik van Verzorgd Nederlands. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Kristiansen, Tore. (2009). The macro level social meaning of late modern Danish accents. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia 41:167–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambert, Wallace E., Hodgson, Richard C., Gardner, Robert C. & Fillenbaum, Stanley. (1960). Evaluative reactions to spoken languages. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 66:44–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James, & Milroy, Lesley. (1985). Authority in language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oudejans, Ans, & Meesters, Marion J. (1998). Het imago van de leraar in het basis- en voortgezet onderwijs. De uitkomsten van een kwalitatief onderzoek, Haarlem: Meesters & Oudejans.Google Scholar
Silverstein, Michael. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In Cline, P. R., Hanks, W., & Hofbauer, C. (eds.), The elements: A parasession on linguistic units and levels. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 193–247.Google Scholar
Smakman, Dick. (2006). Standard Dutch in The Netherlands. A sociolinguistic and phonetic description. Utrecht: LOT Publishers.Google Scholar
Smakman, Dick, & van Bezooijen, Renée. (1997). Een verkenning van populaire ideeën over de standaardtaal van Nederland. Taal en Tongval. Themanummer 10: Standaardisering in Noord en Zuid. 126–139.Google Scholar
Stangor, Charles, & Schaller, Mark. (1996). Stereotypes as individual and collective representations. In Macrae, C. Neil, Stangor, C., & Hewstone, M. (eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Stroop, Jan. (1998). Poldernederlands; waardoor het ABN verdwijnt. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker.Google Scholar
Stroop, Jan. (2000a). Naar een rehabilitatie van het ABN. Nederlandse Taalkunde 5:272–279.Google Scholar
Stroop, Jan. (2000b). Moet het ABN zomaar naar zijn ouwemoer? Moer, Tijdschrift voor het onderwijs in het Nederlands 30:23–27.Google Scholar
Van Bezooijen, Renée. (2001). Poldnederlands. Hoe kijken vrouwen ertegen? Nederlandse Taalkunde 6:257–271.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Hans, & Houtermans, Muriel. (1999). Vlamingen en Nederlanders over de uitspraak van nieuwslezers. In Huls, E. & Weltens, B. (eds.), Artikelen van de derde sociolinguïstische conferentie. Delft: Eburon. 451–462.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Hans, Van Hout, Roeland, & Gerritsen, Marinel. (1997). Watching Dutch change: A real time study of variation and change in Standard Dutch pronunciation. Journal of Sociolinguistics 1:361–391.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Haeringen, Coenraad B. (1924). Eenheid en nuance in beschaafdnederlandse uitspraak. De Nieuwe Taalgids 18:65–86.Google Scholar
Van Hout, Roeland. (2003). Hun zijn jongens. Ontstaan en verspreiding van het onderwerp ‘hun.’ In Stroop, J. (ed.), Waar gaat het Nederlands naartoe? Panorama van een taal. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker. 277–286.Google Scholar
Van Hout, Roeland. (2006). Onstuitbaar en onuitstaanbaar: De toekomst van een omstreden taalverandering. In van der Sijs, N., Stroop, J., & Weerman, F. (eds.), Wat iedereen van het Nederlands moet weten en waarom. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker. 42–54.Google Scholar
Van Hout, Roeland. (2007). Het Europees Handvest en het Limburgs: Het politieke en het taalkundige discours. In Bloemhoff, H. & Hemminga, P. (eds.), Streektaal en duurzaamheid. Berkoop-Olderberkoop: Stichting Stellingwarver Schrieversronte. 33–47.Google Scholar
Van Hout, Roeland, De Schutter, Georges, De Crom, Erica, Huinck, Wendy, Kloots, Hanne, & Van de Velde, Hans. (1999). De uitspraak van het Standaard-Nederlands. Variatie en varianten in Vlaanderen en Nederland. In Huls, E. & Weltens, B. (eds.), Artikelen van de derde sociolinguïstische conferentie. Delft: Eburon. 183–196.Google Scholar
Van Istendael, Geert. (2008). Plezier en pijn van het Nederlands. In Samen beleid maken in het GO! Onderwijs van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap. Beleidscahier nummer 3:29–33. Brussel: Ministerie van Onderwijs van de Vlaamse Gemeenschap.Google Scholar
Verhoeven, Jef C., Aelterman, Antonia, Rots, Isabel, & Buvens, Ina. (2006). Public perceptions of teachers' status in Flanders. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice 12:479–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willemyns, Roland. (2003). Dutch. In Deumert, A. & Vandenbussche, W. (eds.), Germanic standardization: past to present. Impact: Studies in Language and Society 18. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 93–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolard, Kathryn. (1998). Introduction: Language ideology as a field of enquiry. In Schieffelin, B. B., Woolard, K. A., & Kroskrity, P. V. (eds.), Language ideologies. Practice and theory. New York: Oxford University Press. 3–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zahn, Christopher J., & Hopper, Robert. (1985). Measuring language attitudes: The speech evaluation instrument. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 4:113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar