Cover not available

Article published In: Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics
Vol. 6:2 (2017) ► pp.147–173

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Anders, of toch niet?

Het Nederlandse pronominale genus door de bril van Duitse NVT-leerders

 | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster
 | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universitat Munster
 | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universitat Munster
 | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universitat Munster
 | Westfälische Wilhelms-Universitat Munster

Article language: Dutch

Published online: 30 December 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/dujal.17005.urb
Samenvatting
Both in Dutch and to a lesser extent in German, pronouns can agree with a noun’s lexical gender or be chosen on semantic grounds. It is well-known that for non-human antecedents, Dutch seems to be shifting towards a more semantic system, via a process labelled ‘hersemantisering’, in which gender marking on the pronoun increasingly depends on the degree of individuation of the antecedent. This article presents a psycholinguistic investigation on how German learners of Dutch as a foreign language (NVT), who distinguish between three nominal genders in their native language, handle the Dutch gender system, which has largely lost its three-way nominal gender, and in which resemanticisation has progressed significantly. More specifically, a speeded grammaticality judgement task (GJ) was used in conjunction with a sentence completion task to examine the German NVT-learners’ perception as well as the production of pronominal gender in the L2 (in this case Dutch). It was found that German learners of Dutch judge more combinations of pronouns and their antecedents to be grammatical than they actually use. However, unlike in Flanders and the Netherlands, grammatical gender still trumps semantic gender, which we explain as a L1 transfer effect. In addition, the role of participants’ proficiency in Dutch is discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Inleiding
  • 2.Het (pronominale) genus in het Nederlands en Duits
    • 2.1‘Pronominaal genus’ en hersemantisering
    • 2.2Voornaamwoordkeuze in het Duits
    • 2.3Onderzoeksvragen
  • 3.Methode
    • 3.1Procedure en proefpersonen
    • 3.2Materiaal
  • 4.Resultaten
    • 4.1Productiegegevens
    • 4.2 Experiment 1: Lexicaal vs. semantisch genus
    • 4.3 Experiment 2: Masculiene vs. feminiene de-woorden
    • 4.4Transfer vanuit de L1: Het antecedent stof
    • 4.5Gegevens volgens verwervingsniveau
  • 5.Besluit
  • Notes
  • Bibliografie
References (37)
Bibliografie
Audring, J. (2006). Pronominal gender in spoken Dutch. Journal of Germanic Linguistics, 181, 85–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2009). Reinventing pronoun gender. Utrecht: LOT Dissertation Series.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Audring, J., & Booij, G. (2009). Genus als probleemcategorie. Taal en Tongval, 61(1), 13–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (1979). Explicit and implicit judgements of L2 Grammaticality. Language Learning, 29(1), 81–103. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bley-Vroman, R., & Masterson, D. (1989). Reaction time as a supplement to grammaticality judgements in the investigation of second language learners’ competence. University of Hawai’i Working Papers in ESL, 8(2), 207–237.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Booij, G., Lehmann, C., Mugdan, J., & Skopeteas, S. (Eds.). (2004). Morphologie. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Flexion und Wortbildung. 21. Halbband. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cornips, L., & De Vogelaer, G. (2009). Variatie en verandering in het Nederlandse genus: een multidisciplinair perspectief. Taal en Tongval, 61(1), 1–12. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G. (2006). Pronominaal genus bij ‘Zuid-Nederlandse’ taalverwervers: Van grammaticaal naar semantisch systeem. In M. Hüning, U. Vogl, T. van der Wouden, & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Nederlands tussen Duits en Engels (pp. 89–102). Leiden: Stichting Neerlandistiek Leiden.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G. (2011). A dialect continuum of child language: Why dialectology cannot afford to neglect children as informants. In E. Glaser, J. E. Schmidt, & N. Frey (Eds.), Dynamik des Dialekts: Wandel und Variation (pp. 345–364). Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G., & De Sutter, G. (2011). The geography of gender change: Pronominal and adnominal gender in Flemish dialects of Dutch. Language Sciences, 331, 192–205. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G., Poarch, G., & Schimke, S. (2016). Entrenchment of gender inhibits semantic gender in Dutch pronouns: Evidence from speeded grammaticality judgements. Handout op Experimental Approaches to Attitudes, Production and Perception (ExAPP) 3, Wenen, 22–24 september 2016.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vos, L. (2009). De dynamiek van hersemantisering. Taal en Tongval, 61(1), 82–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Pronominal resemanticization in Dutch: A salience-driven redistribution of gender-marked pronouns. Liège: Université de Liège.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Pronominal gender agreement: A salience-based competition. In J. Fleischer, E. Rieken, & P. Widmer (Eds.), Agreement from a diachronic perspective (pp. 127–146). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vos, L., & De Vogelaer, G. (2011). Dutch gender and the locus of morphological regularisation. Folia Linguistica, 451, 245–281. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
E-ANS = Haeseryn, W., Romijn, K., Geerts, G., Rooij, J. de, & Toorn, M. van den. (1997). Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Tweede, geheel herziene druk, 1997. Groningen: Martinus Nijhoff & Deurne: Wolters-Plantyn. Beschikbaar via [URL] [geraadpleegd op 11–07–2016].
Ellis, R. (1991). Grammaticality judgements and Second Language Acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13(2), 161–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hopp, H. (2007). Ultimate attainment at the interfaces in Second Language Acquisition: Grammar and processing. University Library of Groningen [Host].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Klom, J., & De Vogelaer, G. (2017). Semantic agreement competing with syntactic agreement: The case of Dutch pronouns. Leuvense Bijdragen, 1011, 123–149.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kraaikamp, M. (2017). Semantic versus lexical gender. Synchronic and diachronic variation in Germanic gender agreement. Utrecht: LOT Dissertations.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leiss, E. (2000). Gender in Old High German. In B. Unterbeck, & M. Rissanen (Eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition (pp. 237–257). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., Schriefers, H., & Hanique, I. (2010). Native language effects in learning second-language grammatical gender: A training study. Acta Psychologica, 135(2), 150–158. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Luraghi, S. (2011). The origin of the Proto-Indo-European gender system: Typological considerations. Folia Linguistica, 45(2), 435–464. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marinis, T. (2003). Psycholinguistic techniques in second language acquisition research. Second Language Research, 19(2), 144–161. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mills, A. E. (1986). The acquisition of gender. A study of English and German. Berlin: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ruigendijk, E. (2009). Psycholinguistik und Sprachvergleich. Oldenburg: BIS-Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sabourin, L., Stowe, L., & De Haan, G. (2006). Transfer effects in learning a second language grammatical gender system. Second Language Research, 22(1), 1–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schimke, S., De Vogelaer, G., Fanta, J., Poarch, G., & Urbanek, L. (2017). Language change in the use of pronominal gender: Evidence from Southern and Northern varieties of Dutch. Handout International Symposium on Bilingualism (ISB) 11, University of Limerick (Ireland), June 11–15, 2017.
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2012). E-Prime Reference Guide. Pittsburgh: Psychology Software Tools Inc., 2012.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siemund, P. (2002). Mass versus count: Pronominal gender in regional varieties of Germanic languages. Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung, 551, 213–233.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Pronominal gender in English: A study of English varieties from a cross-linguistic perspective. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tremblay, A. (2005). Theoretical and methodological perspectives on the use of grammaticality judgment tasks in linguistic theory. Second Language Studies, 24(1), 129–167.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Dale Groot woordenboek van de Nederlandse taal (2015). Utrecht: Van Dale uitgevers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Emmerik, J., Van Hout, R., Van de Craats, I., Klatter-Folmer, J. (2009). ‘Het’ gaat niet vanzelf. De verwerving van het genus door dove volwassenen en horende tweedetaalleerders. Taal en Tongval, 61(1), 188–226. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Haeringen, C. B. (1956). Nederlands tussen Duits en Engels. Den Haag: Servire.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wöllstein, A. (Eds.). (2016). Duden, die Grammatik. 91., vollst. überarb. und aktualisierte Aufl. Berlin: Dudenverlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wurzel, W. U. (1986). Die wiederholte Klassifikation von Substantiven. Zur Entstehung von Deklinationsklassen. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung, 391, 76‒96.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue