Cover not available

In:Sociolinguistic Variation and Language Acquisition across the Lifespan
Edited by Anna Ghimenton, Aurélie Nardy and Jean-Pierre Chevrot
[Studies in Language Variation 26] 2021
► pp. 51–80

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
The alternation between standard and vernacular pronouns by Belgian Dutch parents in child-oriented control acts

ORCiD logo with link | KU Leuven
ORCiD logo with link | KU Leuven
Published online: 16 August 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/silv.26.03zen
Abstract
This paper studies the social meaning of standard and vernacular pronouns of address in Dutch by zooming in on the position they hold in parents’ control acts to their children. Linking the hyperstandardized linguistic situation in Flanders with the Western-European ideal of democratic parenting, we expect to find that the standard forms are more typically connected to more indirect, softer control acts. This hypothesis is tested through a mixed method approach, where quantitative and qualitative analyses are used to chart the choices of ten Belgian Dutch parents when issuing directives to their children. Studying 452 pronouns we identify a clear link between the choice of variety and parameters such as type of control act, repetition, mitigation and boosting and type of pronoun, with ‘irritation’ as mediating factor.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Control acts
    • 1.2Standard-vernacular variation in control acts
    • 1.3The Dutch language laboratory
  • 2.Data and variables
    • 2.1Self-recordings
    • 2.2Response variable: Pronouns of address in control acts
    • 2.3Predictor variables
  • 3.Analyses and results
    • 3.1Results of the quantitative analyses
    • 3.2Results of the qualitative analyses
  • 4.Discussion and conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (53)
References
Antaki, Charles. 2002. An Introductory Tutorial in Conversation Analysis. Available online at: [URL]
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana. 1990. “You don’t touch lettuce with your fingers: Parental politeness in family discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 14 (2): 259–288. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. Dinner Talk: Cultural Patterns of Sociability and Socialization in Family Discourse. Mahwah, New Jerset: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, and Stephen C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness, Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brumark, Åsa. 2006a. “Non-observance of Gricean maxims in family dinner table conversation”. Journal of Pragmatics 38: 1206–1238. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2006b. “Regulatory Talk and Politeness at the Family Dinner Table”. Pragmatics: Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association 16 (2–3): 171–211. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2010. “Behaviour regulation at the family dinner table. The use of and response to direct and indirect behaviour regulation in ten Swedish families”. Journal of Child Language 37: 1065–1088. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buttny, Richard. 2001. “Therapeutic humor in retelling the clients’ tellings”. Text 21 (3): 303–327. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chevrot, Jean-Pierre, Laurence Beaud, and Renata Varga. 2000. “Developmental data on a French sociolinguistic variable: Post-consonantal word-final /R/”. Language Variation and Change 12: 295–319. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Craven, Alexandra, and Jonathan Potter. 2010. “Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action”. Discourse Studies 12(4): 419–442. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2016. “Agency and autonomy in indirection”. Paper presented at Sociolinguistics Symposium 21, Murcia, Spain.
Curl, Traci S., and Paul Drew. 2008. “Contingency and Action: A Comparison of Two Forms of Requesting.” Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(2): 129–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Debrabandere, Frans. 2005. “Het echec van de ABN-actie in Vlaanderen”. Nederlands van nu 53 (1): 27–31.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Houwer, Annick. 2003. “Language variation and local elements in family discourse”. Language Variation and Change 15: 329–349. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, Gunther. 2008. De Nederlandse en Friese subjectsmarkeerders: geografie, typologie en diachronie. Gent: Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
De Vogelaer, G., & Toye, J. (2017). Acquiring attitudes towards varieties of Dutch: A quantitative perspective. In G. De Vogelaer & M. Katerbow (Eds.), Acquiring sociolinguistic variation (pp. 117–154). John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ervin-Tripp, Susan. 1976. “Is Sybil There? The Structure of Some American English Directives.” Language in Society 5 (1): 25–66. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foulkes, Paul, Gerard Docherty, and Dominic Watt. 2005. “Phonological variation in child-directed speech”. Language 81 (1): 177–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk, and Hans Van de Velde. 2013. Supra-regional characteristics of colloquial Dutch. In Language and Space: An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation, ed. By Frans Hinskens, and Johan Taeldeman. Volume 3: Dutch. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghyselen, Anne-Sophie. 2015. “‘Stabilisering’ van tussentaal?” Taal & Tongval 67 (1): 43–95. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ghyselen, Anne-Sophie, and Gunther De Vogelaer. 2013. “The impact of dialect loss on the acceptance of tussentaal: the special case of West-Flanders in Belgium”. In Language (de)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: experimental studies, edited by Torre Kristiansen, and Stefan Grondelaers, 153–170. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness. 2006. “Participation, affect, and trajectory in family directive/response sequences”. Text & Talk – An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse Communication Studies 26: 515–543. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodwin, Marjorie Harness, and Asta Cekaite. 2013. “Calibration in directive/response sequences in family interaction.” Journal of Pragmatics 46 (1): 122–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grondelaers, Stefan, and Roeland Van Hout. 2011. “The standard language situation in the Low Countries: Top-down and bottom-up variations on a diaglossic theme”. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 23 (3): 199–243. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. “Destandardization is not destandardization”. Taal & Tongval 68 (2): 119–149. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holmes, Janet, Meredith Marra, and Bernadette Vine. 2011. Leadership, Discourse and Ethnicity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaspers, Jürgen, and Sarah Van Hoof. 2013. “Hyperstandardisation in Flanders. Extreme enregisterment and its aftermath”. Pragmatics 23 (2): 331–359. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. “Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction”. In Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation, edited by Gene H. Lerner, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara, Jennifer Andrus, and Andrew E. Danielson. 2006. “Mobility, indexicality, and the enregisterment of ‘Pittsburghese’.” Journal of English Linguistics 32 (4): 77–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kent, Alexandra. 2012. “Compliance, resistance and incipient compliance when responding to directives.” Discourse Studies 14 (6): 711–730. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lybaert, Chloé. 2014. “Perceptie van tussentaal in het gesproken Nederlands in Vlaanderen. Een experimentele benadering van saillantie”. Nederlandse Taalkunde 19 (2): 185–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Mahwah (NJ): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2011. “Understanding as an embodied, situated and sequential achievement in interaction”. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 542–552. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016. Conventions for multimodal transcription. Available online at: [URL]
Ochs, Elinor, and Schieffelin, Bambi B. 1984. “Language acquisition and socialization: Three developmental stories.” In Culture theory: Mind, self, and emotion, edited by Richard Shweder and Robert LeVine, 276–320. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ochs, Elinor and Shohet, Merav. 2006. “The Cultural Structuring of Mealtime Socialization.” New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development 111: 35–49. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pećnik, Nina. 2007. “Towards a vision of parenting in the best interest of the child”. In Parenting in Contemporary Europe: a Positive Approach, edited by Mary Daly, 15–36. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Plevoets, Koen. 2008. Tussen spreek- en standaardtaal. Een corpusgebaseerd onderzoek naar de situationele, regionale en sociale verspreiding van enkele morfosyntactische verschijnselen uit het gesproken Belgisch-Nederlands. University of Leuven dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Preston, Dennis. 2013. “The influence of regard on language variation and change”. Journal of Pragmatics 52: 93–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. URL [URL]
Rossi, Giovanni, and Jorg Zinken. 2016. “Grammar and social agency: the pragmatics of impersonal deontic statements.” Language 92 (4): e296–e325. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samara, Anna, Kenny Smith, Helen Brown, and Elizabeth Wonnacott. 2017. Acquiring variation in an artificial language: Children and adults are sensitive to socially conditioned linguistic variation. Cognitive Psychology 94: 85–114. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schaffer, H. Rudolph. 1996. Social Development. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schieffelin, Bambi B., and Elinor Ochs. 1986. “Language socialization.” Annual Review of Anthropology 15: 163–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Searle, John. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneidman, Laura, and Amanda L. Woodward. 2015. “Are child-directed interactions the cradle of social learning?” Psychological Bulletin 142 (1): 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stevanovic, Melisa, and Anssi Peräkylä. 2012. “Deontic authority in interaction: The right to announce, propose, and decide”. Research on Language and Social Interaction 45 (3): 297–321. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, Jason Grafmiller, Benedikt Heller, and Melanie Röthlisberger. 2016. Around the world in three alternations Modeling syntactic variation in varieties of English. English World-Wide 37 (2): 109–137. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali, and Harald Baayen. 2012. “Models, forests, and trees of York English: Was/were variation as a case study for statistical practice”. Language Variation and Change 24: 135–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandekerckhove, Reinhild. 2004. “Waar zijn je, jij en jou(w) gebleven? Pronominale aanspreekvorm in het gesproken Nederlands van Vlamingen”. In Taeldeman, man van de taal, schatbewaarder van de taal, edited by Johan De Caluwe, Georges De Schutter, Magda Devos, and Jacques Van Keymeulen, 981–995. Gent: Academia Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van De Mieroop, Dorien, Eline Zenner, and Stefania Marzo. 2016. “Standard and Colloquial Belgian Dutch pronouns of address: A variationist-interactional study of child-directed speech in dinner table interactions”. Folia Linguistica 50 (1): 31–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zenner, Eline, Dirk Geeraerts, and Dirk Speelman. 2009. “Expeditie Tussentaal: leeftijd, identiteit en context in ‘Expeditie Robinson’”. Nederlandse Taalkunde 14: 26–44. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zenner, Eline, Gitte Kristiansen, and Dirk Geeraerts. 2016. Individual differences and in situ identity marking: Colloquial Belgian Dutch in the reality TV show “Expeditie Robinson”. In Exploring Discourse Strategies in Social and Cognitive Interaction: Multimodal and cross-linguistic perspectives, edited by Manuela Romano, and M. Dolores Porto, 39–77. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Naborn, Lars, Dorien Van De Mieroop & Eline Zenner
2023. Emotion in multivarietal family language policy in Flanders. International Journal of Bilingualism 27:2 ► pp. 181 ff. DOI logo
Kristiansen, Gitte, Eline Zenner & Dirk Geeraerts
2018. English as a lingua franca in Europe: The identification of L1 and L2 accents. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 16:2 ► pp. 494 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