Cover not available

In:Intermediate Language Varieties: Koinai and regional standards in Europe
Edited by Massimo Cerruti and Stavroula Tsiplakou
[Studies in Language Variation 24] 2020
► pp. 55–78

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

Chapter 3
Surviving Limburg and Hollandic dialect features and what they have in common

 | Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam | Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen
Published online: 22 June 2020
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.24.03hin
Abstract
Two studies of processes of dialect levelling are presented. The first one concerns a divergent local Limburg dialect of Dutch. The second study concerns 15 local Hollandic dialects, spoken in the northwestern corner of the country. Whereas the Limburg study is based on data from the author’s fieldwork recordings, the Hollandic investigation is based on questionnaire data from two huge (equally fieldwork-based) projects. The Limburg study focusses on 20 dialect features (in the phonological, morphological and syntactic modules) and allows for apparent time comparisons, while the Hollandic research permits real time comparisons of the variation in 7 features in the phonological and morphosyntactic components. For both studies the data were elicited from individual speakers. The dialects in both areas appear to arrive at their own unique selection of non-standard features. Despite the many differences and despite the fact that the dialect situations differ in several respects, the findings of both studies converge in the sense that the resistant phenomena share properties pertaining to their relative geographical distribution, their socio-emblematic nature and, internally, to the architecture of language components, the conditioning/regularity of the phenomena as well as their mutual coherence, both structurally and statistically.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Studies on recent developments in the Dutch dialect landscape
  • 3.Ripuarian and East-Limburg dialects
  • 4.Hollandic dialects of Noord-Holland
  • 5.Sizing up
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (33)
References
Auer, P. (2005). Europe’s sociolinguistic unity, or: A typology of European dialect/standard constellations. In N. Delbecque, J. van der Auwera, & D. Geeraerts (Eds.), Perspectives on variation. Sociolinguistic, historical, comparative (pp. 7–42). Berlin/New York: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bakkes, P. (1996). Variatie en verandering in het Montforts: taalstructurele en sociolinguistische aspecten van een veranderend dorpsdialect. PhD Dissertation, Nijmegen University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cornips, L. (1994). Syntactische variatie in het Algemeen Nederlands van Heerlen. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vink, L. (2004). Dialect en dialectverandering in Katwijk aan Zee. PhD Dissertation, Leiden University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frings, T. (1926). Sprache. In H. Aubin, T. Frings, & J. Müller (Eds.), Kulturströmungen und Kulturprovinzen in den Rheinlanden (pp. 90–185). Bonn: Röhrscheid.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1957). Grundlegung einer Geschichte der deutschen Sprache. Halle (Saale): Niemeyer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghyselen, A.-S. (2016). From diglossia to diaglossia. In M.-H. Côté, R. Knooihuizen, & J. Nerbonne (Eds.), The future of dialects: Selected papers from Methods in Dialectology XV (pp. 35–62). Berlin: Language Science Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guy, G. R., & Hinskens, F. (2016). Linguistic coherence; systems, repertoires and speech communities. In F. Hinskens, & G. R. Guy (Eds.), Coherence, covariation and bricolage: Various approaches to the systematicity of language variation. Special issue of Lingua, 172–173, 1–9.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinskens, F. (1992). Dialect levelling in Limburg. Structural and sociolinguistic aspects. PhD Dissertation, University of Nijmegen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Despite or because of intensive contact? Internal, external and extralinguistic aspects of divergence in modern dialects and ethnolects of Dutch. In K. Braunmüller, S. Höder, & K. Kühl (Eds.), Stability and divergence in language contact: Factors and mechanisms (pp. 109–140). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinskens, F., Auer, P., & Kerswill, P. (2005). The study of dialect convergence and divergence: Conceptual and methodological considerations. In P. Auer, F. Hinskens, & P. Kerswill (Eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages (pp. 1–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinskens, F., & van Hout, R. (2013). Language and space in Dutch: Recent developments and new research. In F. Hinskens, & J. Taeldeman (Eds.), Language and space. Dutch (pp. 35–60). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoekstra, E., & van Koppen, M. (2013). Holland and Utrecht: Morphology and syntax. In F. Hinskens, & J. Taeldeman (Eds.), Language and space. Dutch (pp. 418–443). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoppenbrouwers, C. (1983). Het genus in een Brabants regiolect. Tabu 13(1), 1–25.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1990). Het regiolect: van dialect tot Algemeen Nederlands. Muiderberg: Coutinho.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobi, I. (2009). On variation and change in diphthongs and long vowels of spoken Dutch. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jansen, M. (2010). Language change on the Dutch Frisian island of Ameland. Linguistic and sociolinguistic findings. PhD Dissertation, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1994). Principles of linguistic change. Volume 2: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2010). Principles of linguistic change. Volume 3: Cognitive and cultural factors. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Münstermann, H. (1989). Dialect loss in Maastricht: attitudes, functions and structures. In K. Deprez (Ed.), Language and intergroup relations in Flanders and in The Netherlands (pp. 99–128). Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pannekeet, J. (1991). Het Westfries. Inventarisatie van dialectkenmerken. Wormerveer: Stichting Uitgeverij Noord-Holland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rindler Schjerve, R. (1987). Sprachkontakt auf Sardinien. Soziolinguistische Untersuchungen des Sprachwechsels im ländlichen Bereich. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schirmunsky, V. (1930). Sprachgeschichte und Siedelungsmundarten. Germanisch-Romanische Monatschrift, 18.I/II, 113–122/171–188.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stroop, J. (1998). Poldernederlands, waardoor het ABN verdwijnt. Amsterdam: Bert Bakker.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Taeldeman, J. (2006). Polarization revisited. In F. Hinskens (Ed.), Language variation. European perspectives. Selected papers from the Third International Conference on Language Variation in Europe (ICLaVE 3), Amsterdam, June 2005 (pp. 233–248). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thelander, M. (1982). A qualitative approach to the quantitative data of speech variation. In S. Romaine (Ed.), Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities (pp. 65–83). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Bree, C. (1985). Structuurverlies en structuurbehoud in het dialect van Haaksbergen en Enschede: een onderzoek naar verschillen in resistentie. Leuvense Bijdragen, 74(1), 1–35.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Coetsem, F. (1988). Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact. Dordrecht: Foris. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandekerckhove, R. (2000). Structurele en sociale aspecten van dialectverandering. De dynamiek van het Deerlijkse dialect. Gent: KANTL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Oostendorp, M. (2013). Holland and Utrecht: Phonology and phonetics. In F. Hinskens, & J. Taeldeman (Eds.), Language and space. Dutch (pp. 399–418). Berlin/Boston: de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Voortman, B. (1994). Regionale variatie in het taalgebruik van notabelen. Een sociolinguïstisch onderzoek in Middelburg, Roermond en Zutphen. PhD Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. (1954). Is a structural dialectology possible? Word, 10, 388–400. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winkler, J. (1874). Algemeen Nederduitsch en Friesch Dialecticon. Tweede deel. ’s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Vergeiner, Philip C. & Dominik Wallner
2022. On explaining stable dialect features: A real- and apparent-time study on the variable (en) in Austrian base dialects. Open Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 65 ff. DOI logo
Beaman, Karen V.
2021. Chapter 6. Exploring an approach for modelling lectal coherence. In Language Variation – European Perspectives VIII [Studies in Language Variation, 25], ► pp. 136 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 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.

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