Article published In: Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 6:2 (2017) ► pp.231–246
The colour of Dutch
Some limits and opportunities of identifying Dutch ethnolects
Published online: 30 December 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.17002.jas
https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.17002.jas
Abstract
Many studies in recent years identify and discuss Dutch ethnolects. Generally this work takes linguistic phenomena as directly reflective of speakers’ ethnic identity. But if ethnicity is an inherent speaker feature, the absence of white ethnolect descriptions is difficult to explain. In this paper, therefore, I wish to judge the appeal of the notion of ethnolect against its usefulness for explaining language use. I argue that ethnolect can usefully label everyday ethnicisations of language, but that such evaluations generally compress a more complex reality in which so-called ethnolectal features are recruited for other purposes than (un)marking one’s ascribed ethnicity. Crucial to unpacking this reality is the distinction of an intermediary step, the construction of interactional stance, between the use of linguistic features and their association with common-sense identity categories.
Keywords: ethnolect, ethnicity, ethnicisation, stance, Moroccan Dutch, Antwerp dialect
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Perceiving ‘Moroccan’ ways of speaking
- 3.Identifying Dutch ethnolects
- 4.Problems with ethnolects
- 5.Multidimensional indexicality and stance
- 6.Conclusion
References
References (33)
Agha, A. (2004). Registers of language. In A. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology (pp. 23–45). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2004). Language and identity. In A. Duranti (Ed.), A companion to linguistic anthropology (pp. 369–394). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Cornips, L., & De Rooij, V. (2013). Selfing and othering through categories of race, place, and language among minority youths in Rotterdamn, the Netherlands. In P. Siemund, I. Gogolin, M. E. Schulz, & J. Davydova (Eds.), Multilingualism and language diversity in urban areas (pp. 129–164). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Coupland, N. (2010). Language, ideology, media and social change. In K. Junod, & D. Maillat (Eds.), Performing the self (pp. 127–151). Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Eckert, P. (2008a). Where do ethnolects stop? International Journal of Bilingualism, 12(1–2), 25–41.
Gadet, F., & Hambye, P. (2014). Contact and ethnicity in ‘youth language’ description: In search of specificity. In R. Nicolaï (Ed.), Questioning language contact. Limits of contact, contact at its limits (pp. 183–216). Leiden: Brill.
Haugen, E. (1972). The ecology of language. Essays by Einar Haugen. (Selected and introduced by A. S. Dil). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Hinskens, F. (2011). Emerging Moroccan and Turkish varieties of Dutch: Ethnolects or ethnic styles? In F. Kern, & M. Selting (Eds.), Ethnic styles of speaking in European metropolitan areas (pp. 101–129). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
(2016). Wijdvertakte wortels. Over etnolectisch Nederlands. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press – Meertens Instituut (KNAW).
Jaspers, J. (2005). Linguistic sabotage in a context of monolingualism and standardization. Language and Communication, 25(3), 279–297.
(2008). Problematizing ethnolects. Naming linguistic practices in an Antwerp secondary school. International Journal of Bilingualism, 12(1–2), 85–103.
(2011). Strange bedfellows. Appropriations of a tainted urban dialect. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15(4), 493–524.
Muysken, P. (2013). Ethnolects of Dutch. In F. Hinskens & J. Taeldeman (Eds.), Language and Space: Dutch (pp. 739–761). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Nortier, J. (2008). Introduction. Ethnolects? The emergence of new varieties among adolescents. International Journal of Bilingualism, 12(1–2), 1–5.
Nortier, J., & Dorleijn, M. (2008). A Moroccan accent in Dutch: A socio-cultural style restricted to the Moroccan community? International Journal of Bilingualism, 12(1–2), 125–142.
Ochs, E. (1992). Indexing gender. In A. Duranti, & C. Goodwin (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335–358). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
(1996). Linguistic resources for socializing humanity. In J. Gumperz & S. Levinson (Eds.), Rethinking linguistic relativity (pp. 407–437). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Phillips, A. (2010). What’s wrong with essentialism? Distinktion. Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory, 11(1), 47–60.
Rampton, B. (2006). Language in late modernity. Interaction at an urban school. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ruette, T., & Van de Velde, F. (2013). Moroccorp: tien miljoen woorden uit twee Marokkaans-Nederlandse chatkanalen. Lexicos, 231, 456–475.
Snell, J. (2010). From sociolinguistic variation to socially strategic stylisation. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 14(5), 630–656.
Van Aelst, T. (writer & director) (2013). Wat als iedereen sprak als een Marokkaan? In Shelter (producer), Wat als? Vilvoorde: Vlaamse TelevisieMaatschappij (VTM).
Van der Sijs, N. (2014). Systematisch onderzoek naar Nederlandse contactvariëteiten. Taal & Tongval, 66(2), 117–142.
Van Meel, L., Hinskens, F., & Van Hout, R. (2013). Ethnolectal variation in the realization of /z/ by Dutch youngsters. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 80(3), 297–325.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Cornips, Leonie
Kanobana, Sibo & Mi-Cha Flubacher
Olszewska, Aleksandra Ita & Toril Opsahl
Auer, Peter & Vanessa Siegel
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
