Cover not available

Article published In: Mental representations in receptive multilingualism
Edited by Bonnie C. Holmes and Michael T. Putnam
[Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 10:3] 2020
► pp. 351–379

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

How well can intelligibility of closely related languages in Europe be predicted by linguistic and non-linguistic variables?

 | University of Groningen
 | University of Groningen | Pannon Egyetem
Published online: 28 January 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.17084.goo
Abstract
We measured mutual intelligibility of 16 closely related spoken languages in Europe. Intelligibility was determined for all 70 language combinations using the same uniform methodology (a cloze test). We analysed the results of 1833 listeners representing the mutual intelligibility between young, educated Europeans from the same 16 countries.
Lexical, phonological, orthographic, morphological and syntactic distances were computed as linguistic variables. We also quantified non-linguistic variables (e.g. exposure, attitudes towards the test languages). Using stepwise regression analysis the importance of linguistic and non-linguistic predictors for the mutual intelligibility in the 70 language pairs was assessed.
Exposure to the test language was the most important variable, overriding all other variables. Then, limiting the analysis to the prediction of inherent intelligibility, we analysed the results for a subset of listeners with no or little previous exposure to the test language. Linguistic distances, especially lexical distance, now explain a substantial part of the variance.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Material
    • 2.1Intelligibility of closely related languages
      • 2.1.1Test languages
      • 2.1.2Texts
      • 2.1.3Speakers and recordings
      • 2.1.4Listeners
      • 2.1.5Intelligibility test
      • 2.1.6Procedure
    • 2.2Linguistic and non-linguistic variables
      • 2.2.1Non-linguistic variables
        • 2.2.1.1Years of learning
        • 2.2.1.2Amount of exposure
        • 2.2.1.3Attitude
      • 2.2.2Linguistic variables
        • 2.2.2.1Lexical distance
        • 2.2.2.2Phonetic distance
        • 2.2.2.3Orthographic distance, stem and affix
        • 2.2.2.4Syntactic distance
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Predicting intelligibility from linguistic and non-linguistic variables
    • 3.2Predicting inherent intelligibility from linguistic variables only
  • 4.Conclusions and discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (36)
References
Braunmüller, K. (2007). Receptive multilingualism in Northern Europe in the Middle Ages: A description of a scenario. In J. D. ten Thije & L. Zeevaert (Eds.), Receptive multilingualism (pp. 25–47). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Council of Europe (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages. Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Delsing, L. O., & Lundin Åkesson, K. (2005). Håller språket ihop Norden? En forskningsrapport om ungdomars förståelse av danska, svenska och norska [Does the language keep together the Nordic countries? A research report of mutual comprehension between young Danes, Swedes and Norwegians]. Copenhagen: Nordiska ministerrådet. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doetjes, G., & Gooskens, C. (2009). Skriftsprogets rolle i den dansk-svenske talesprogsforståelse [The role of orthography in the mutual intelligibility of spoken Danish and Swedish]. Språk och stil, 191, 105–123.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giles, H., & Niedzielski, N. (1998). Italian is beautiful, German is ugly. In L. Bauer & P. Trudgill (Eds.), Language myths (pp. 85–93). London: Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Golubović, J. (2016). Mutual intelligibility in the Slavic language area. Groningen: Center for Language and Cognition.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gooskens, C. (accepted). Receptive multilingualism. In S. Montanari & S. Quay (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on multilingualism . Berlin: De Gruyter.
(2006). Linguistic and extra-linguistic predictors of Inter-Scandinavian intelligibility. In J. van de Weijer & B. Los (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands, 231, (pp. 101–113). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). The contribution of linguistic factors to the intelligibility of closely related languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 28(6), 445–467. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gooskens, C., & Bezooijen, R. van (2006). Mutual comprehensibility of written Afrikaans and Dutch: symmetrical or asymmetrical? Literary and Linguistic Computing, 231, 543–557. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gooskens, C., Bezooijen, R. van, & Heuven, V. J. van (2015). Mutual intelligibility of Dutch-German cognates by children: The devil is in the detail. Linguistics, 53(2), 255–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gooskens, C., & Heeringa, W. (in preparation). Linguistic distances between Germanic, Romance and Slavic languages.
Gooskens, C., & Heuven, V. J. van (2017). Measuring cross-linguistic intelligibility in the Germanic, Romance and Slavic language groups. Speech Communication, 891, 25–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gooskens, C., Heuven, V. J. van, Golubović, J., Schüppert, A., Swarte, F., & Voigt, S. (2018). Mutual intelligibility between closely related language in Europe. International Journal of Multilingualism, 15(2), 169–193. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hedquist, R. (1985). Nederländares förståelse av danka och svenska. En språkpedagogisk undersökning med utnyttjande av likheterna mellan språken. Umeå: Institutionerna för fonetik och nordiska språk, Umeå universiteit.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heeringa, W., Swarte, F., Schüppert, A., & Gooskens, C. (2017). Measuring syntactical variation in Germanic texts. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities 33(2), 279–296. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heuven, V. J. van. (2008). Making sense of strange sounds: (Mutual) intelligibility of related language varieties. A review. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing, 2(1–2), 39–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hilton, N. H., Gooskens, C., & Schüppert, A. (2013). The influence of non-native morphosyntax on the intelligibility of a closely related language. Lingua, 1371, 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Impe, L. (2010). Mutual intelligibility of national and regional varieties of Dutch in the Low Countries. Leuven: University of Leuven.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maurud, Ø. (1976). Nabospråksforståelse i Skandinavia. En undersøkelse om gjensidig forståelse av tale- og skriftspråk i Danmark, Norge og Sverige. [Neighbouring language comprehension of spoken and written language in Denmark, Norway and Sweden.] Stockholm: Nordiska rådet.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nerbonne, J., & Heeringa, W. (2010). Measuring dialect differences. In J. E. Schmidt & P. Auer (Eds.), Language and Space: Theories and Methods. Handbooks of Linguistics and Communication Science (pp. 550–567). Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nerbonne, J., & Wiersma, W. (2006). A measure of Aggregate Syntactic Distance. In J. Nerbonne & E. Hinrichs (Eds.), Linguistic Distances Workshop at the joint conference of International Committee on Computational Linguistics and the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sydney, July, 2006 (pp. 82–90).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Perre, L., & Ziegler, J. C. (2008). On-line activation of orthography in spoken word recognition. Brain Research, 11881, 132–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schüppert, A. (2011). Origin of asymmetry: Mutual intelligibility of spoken Danish and Swedish. Groningen: Center for Language and Cognition.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schüppert, A., Hilton, N. H., & Gooskens, C. (2015). Swedish is beautiful, Danish is ugly? Investigating the link between language attitudes and intelligibility. Linguistics, 53(2), 375–403. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Séguy, J. (1973). La dialectométrie dans l’Atlas linguistique de la Gascogne [The dialectometry in the Linguistic Atlas of Gascogne]. Revue de Linguistique Romane, 371, 1–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sherkina-Lieber, M. (2015). Tense, aspect, and agreement in heritage Labrador Inuttitut. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 5(1), 30–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swarte, F. (2016). Predicting the mutual intelligibility of Germanic languages from linguistic and extralinguistic factors. Groningen: Center for Language and Cognition.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tang, C., & Heuven, V. J. van (2009). Mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects experimentally tested. Lingua, 119(5), 709–732. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015). Predicting mutual intelligibility of Chinese dialects from multiple objective linguistic distance measures. Linguistics, 53(2), 285–312. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taylor, W. L. (1953). Cloze procedure: A new tool for measuring readability. Journalism Quarterly, 301, 415–433. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thije, J. D. ten, & Zeevaert, L. (2007). Introduction. In J. D. ten Thije & L. Zeevaert (Eds.). Receptive Multilingualism (pp. 1–25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vanhove, J. (2014). Receptive multilingualism across the lifespan. Cognitive and linguistic factors in cognate guessing. Fribourg: University of Fribourg.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Voigt, S. (in preparation). Predicting the (mutual) intelligibility of Romance languages from linguistic and extra-linguistic factors. Groningen: Center for Language and Cognition.
Wolff, H. (1959). Intelligibility and inter-ethnic attitudes. Anthropological Linguistics, 11, 34–41.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeevaert, L. (2004). Interskandinavische Kommunikation. Strategien zur Etablierung von Verständigung zwischen Skandinaviern im Diskurs. [Interscandinavian communication. Strategies for establishing comprehension between Scandinavians in discourse.] Hamburg: Verlag Dr. Kovač.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (12)

Cited by 12 other publications

Falk, Ylva & Camilla Bardel
2025. The L2/L3 initial state, initial stages and judgement tasks: The role of intercomprehension when judging unknown languages. Second Language Research 41:2 ► pp. 471 ff. DOI logo
Pons‐Sanz, Sara M. & Seán Roberts
2025. The Integration of Norse‐Derived Terms in English: Effects of Formal Similarity1. Transactions of the Philological Society DOI logo
Tang, Chaoju, Vincent J. van Heuven, Wilbert Heeringa & Charlotte Gooskens
2025. Chinese “Dialects” and European “Languages”: A Comparison of Lexico-Phonetic and Syntactic Distances. Languages 10:6 ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Bent, Tessa, Malachi Henry, Rachael F. Holt & Holly Lind-Combs
2024. Relating pronunciation distance metrics to intelligibility across English accents. Journal of Phonetics 107 ► pp. 101357 ff. DOI logo
Hicks, Nina Selina
2024. Exploring systematic orthographic crosslinguistic similarities to enhance foreign language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research 28:6 ► pp. 2385 ff. DOI logo
Heeringa, Wilbert, Charlotte Gooskens & Vincent J. van Heuven
2023. Comparing Germanic, Romance and Slavic: Relationships among linguistic distances. Lingua 287 ► pp. 103512 ff. DOI logo
Kudera, Jacek, Irina Stenger, Bernd Möbius, Tania Avgustinova & Dietrich Klakow
2023. Phonetic Cues in Auditory Identification of Bulgarian, Czech, Polish, and Russian Language of Origin. Language and Speech 66:3 ► pp. 606 ff. DOI logo
Ozek, Fatih, Bilgit Saglam & Charlotte Gooskens
2023. Mutual intelligibility of a Kurmanji and a Zazaki dialect spoken in the province of Elazığ, Turkey. Applied Linguistics Review 14:5 ► pp. 1411 ff. DOI logo
Saturno, Jacopo
2023. The impact of interlingual correspondences on cognate recognition in Slavic intercomprehension. Russian Linguistics 47:2 ► pp. 209 ff. DOI logo
Stenger, Irina & Tania Avgustinova
2023. Web-based experiments in mediated receptive multilingualism. Papers of the Institute for Bulgarian Language “Prof. Lyubomir Andreychin” 36:XXXVI ► pp. 7 ff. DOI logo
Gooskens, Charlotte, Sebastian Kürschner & Vincent J. van Heuven
2022. The role of loanwords in the intelligibility of written Danish among Swedes. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 45:1 ► pp. 4 ff. DOI logo
Holmes, Bonnie C. & Michael T. Putnam
2020. Mental representations in receptive multilingual grammars. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 10:3 ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 november 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue