Grytolle wrote:Ook al was het geen vraag (ik kan ook puntjes maken(!)):
Alle schoolspecifieke termen! Hebt gellen het bijvoorbeeld over "den tweeden zit"?
Grytolle wrote:Dan moet ge 't zelf opzoeken !
More than half a
century of official language policy promoting the use of the northernbased
(Netherlandic) standard language could not prevent or suppress
this evolution, and appears to be increasingly unsuccessful in doing so.
Consequently, the attitudinal component will have to be a major point
of interest in future research on language use in northern Belgium in
order to reveal the ultimate causes for Belgian colloquial Dutch diverging
from Standard Dutch instead of converging with standard (Netherlandic)
Dutch, and, more particularly, in order to explain why, through
an ‘informal standardization process’, Dutch is increasingly becoming
an pluricentric language with two centres of standardization.
Another striking finding concerning the distribution of the pronoun, lies in the fact that the pronoun je in subject position is much better represented in enclitic position than in proclitic position. This implies that example (4) is less likely to occur in the corpus than examples (5) or (6):
(4) Je komt (‘You come’)
(5) Kom je (‘Do you come?’)
(6) Ik hoop dat je komt (‘I hope that you come’)
This might be explained both in terms of the dialect geography of northern Belgium and in terms of the je-pronoun being less conspicuous in enclitic position. However, we will not enlarge on this aspect here (cf. Vandekerckhove 2004)
Flemings increasingly use a supraregional language variety with strong Brabantic influence.
It has often been called an ‘intermediate language variety’ because, from a structural perspective, it is situated in between the standard language and the Brabantic dialects
One of the indisputable exponents of this Flemish colloquial variety is the pronoun ge. It is an endogenous Brabantic pronoun, which is also present in the East-Flemish dialects and to a minor extent in the Limburg and West-Flemish dialects. The pronoun je however, is, to a smaller or greater degree, an endogenous pronoun in West-Flanders as well. This might explain the higher scores for the Standard Dutch pronoun in West-Flanders and consequently the outsider position of this province, to some extent. However, the peripheral position of the province, with East-Flanders functioning as a kind of buffer which separates WestFlanders from the Brabantic area, might be an explanatory factor aswell
So, although their dialect may persist to a major or minor extent, their supraregional speech certainly should also be interpreted in terms of a choice between either the use of Standard Dutch variants (which may or may not correspond to the variants they use in their native
dialect) or the adoption of Brabantic elements (which also may or may not correspond to the endogenous dialect variants).
the younger generation shows a significantly higher preference for the endogenous Belgian Dutch and more particularly Brabantic variants than the older one.
This is even more striking in view of the fact that, first of all, all of these younger informants were required to speak Standard Dutch and that, secondly, all of them have a high level of education. The latter factor implies that their language choices cannot be ascribed to a limited command of the Standard Dutch paradigm. [...]
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest