Article published In: Studies in Language
Vol. 42:4 (2018) ► pp.798–846
Human impersonal pronouns in West Germanic
A questionnaire-based comparative study of Afrikaans, Dutch and English
Published online: 4 February 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18036.van
https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.18036.van
Abstract
In this article, we examine and compare the main human impersonal pronouns in Afrikaans, Dutch and English. The
second person singular, the third person plural and the ‘man’- and ‘one’-pronouns are studied by means of an acceptability
judgment questionnaire and a completion questionnaire. The combination of the two methods reveals interesting descriptive facts
about the three West Germanic languages. They include, among other things, the ‘man’-prominence of Afrikaans versus the
‘you’-prominence of Dutch and English for expressing the universal meaning ‘anyone’ and the more prominent position of ‘they’ in
Dutch than in the other languages for conveying the existential meaning ‘someone, some people’. Our findings have a number of more
theoretical implications too. The two existing semantic maps for human impersonal pronouns make different distinctions in the
existential domain, based on type/level of (un)knownness on the one hand and number on the other. Our study tests both sets of
distinctions and shows that the two dimensions interact with each other in Afrikaans, Dutch and English. The results thus support
a recent proposal in the literature for a combined semantic map. The data from the completion questionnaire, finally, also
indicates that existential uses prefer alternative forms of impersonalization to human impersonal pronouns in all three
languages.
Keywords: acceptability, Afrikaans, completion, Dutch, English, impersonal pronoun, questionnaire, semantic map
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Methodology
- 2.1Acceptability judgment questionnaire
- 2.2Completion questionnaire
- 2.3Earlier questionnaires
- 2.4Delivery and participants
- 2.5Statistics
- 3.Universal-internal uses
- 3.1Acceptability judgment task
- 3.2Completion task
- 3.3Interim conclusion
- 4.Non-universal-internal uses
- 4.1Acceptability judgment task
- 4.2Completion task
- 4.3Interim conclusion
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (35)
Baayen, R. Harald. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bard, Ellen G., Dan Robertson & Antonella Sorace. 1996. Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language 72(1). 32–68.
Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia. 2010. Binding properties of impersonal human pronouns in generic and episodic contexts. [URL] (6 April, 2017.)
Cheshire, Jenny. 2013. Grammaticalisation in social context: The emergence of a new English pronoun. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17(5). 608–633.
Coussé, Evie & Johan van der Auwera. 2012. Human impersonal pronouns in Swedish and Dutch: A contrastive study of man and men
. Languages in Contrast 12(2). 121–138.
De Hoop, Helen & Sammie Tarenskeen. 2015. It’s all about you in Dutch. Journal of Pragmatics 881. 163–175.
Deringer, Lisa, Volker Gast, Florian Haas & Olga Rudolf. 2015. Impersonal uses of the second person singular and generalized empathy: An exploratory corpus study of English, German and Russian. In Laure Gardelle & Sandrine Sorlin (eds.), The pragmatics of personal pronouns, 311–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Duinhoven, A. M. 1990. Verdwijnt men? [Is men disappearing?] In Hans den Besten, A. M. Duinhoven & Jan P. A. Stroop (eds.), Vragende wijs: Vragen over tekst, taal en taalgeschiedenis [Interrogative mood: Questions about tekst, language and language history], 70–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Fonesca-Greber, Bonnie & Linda R. Waugh. 2003. On the radical difference between the subject personal pronouns in written and spoken European French. In Pepi Leistyna & Charles F. Meyer (eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, 225–240. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Gast, Volker. 2015. On the use of translation corpora in contrastive linguistics: A case study of impersonalization in English and German. Languages in Contrast 15(1). 4–33.
. 2017. Online database for a typology of human impersonal pronouns. [URL] (4 July, 2017.)
Gast, Volker, Lisa Deringer, Florian Haas & Olga Rudolf. 2015. Impersonal uses of the second person singular: A pragmatic analysis of generalization and empathy effects. Journal of Pragmatics 881. 148–162.
Gast, Volker & Johan van der Auwera. 2013. Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns, based on data from European languages. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in the memory of Anna Siewierska, 119–158. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Giacalone Ramat, Anna & Andrea Sansò. 2007. The spread and decline of indefinite man-constructions in European languages: An areal perspective. In Paolo Ramat & Elisa Roma (eds.), Europe and the Mediterranean linguistic areas: Convergences from a historical and typological Perspective, 95–131. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Greenbaum, Sidney & Randolph Quirk. 1970. Elicitation experiments in English: Linguistic studies in use and attitude. London: Longman.
Hoekstra, Jarich. 2010. On the impersonal pronoun men in Modern West Frisian. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 13(1). 31–59.
Hofmeister, Philip, T. Florian Jaeger, Ivan Sag, Inbal Arnon & Neal Snider. 2007. Locality and accessibility in wh-questions. In Sam Featherston & Wolfgang Sternefeld (eds.), Roots: Linguistics in search of its evidential base, 185–206. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Kirsten, Johanita. 2016. Grammatikale verandering in Afrikaans van 1911–2010 [Grammatical change in Afrikaans from 1991–2010]. Vanderbijlpark: North-West University dissertation.
Posio, Pekka & Maria Vilkuna. 2013. Referential dimensions of human impersonals in dialectal European Portuguese and Finnish. Linguistics 51(1). 177–229.
Rasinger, Sebastian M. 2013. Quantitative research in linguistics: An introduction. London: Bloomsbury.
. 2011. Overlap and complementarity in reference impersonals: Man-constructions vs. third person plural-impersonal in the languages of Europe. In Andrej Malchukov & Anna Siewierska (eds.), Impersonal constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective, 57–89. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Siewierska, Anna & Maria Papastathi. 2011. Towards a typology of third personal plural impersonals. Linguistics 49(3). 575–610.
Sprouse, Jon & Diogo Almeida. 2012. Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger’s Core Syntax
. Journal of Linguistics 48(3). 609–652.
van der Auwera, Johan. 2011. Standard Average European. In Bernd Kortmann & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Europe: A comprehensive guide, 291–306. Berlin: De Gruyter.
van der Auwera, Johan, Volker Gast & Jeroen Vanderbiesen. 2012. Human impersonal pronoun uses in English, Dutch and German. Leuvense Bijdragen 981. 27–64.
van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir A. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1). 79–124.
Van Olmen, Daniël & Adri Breed. 2018. Human impersonal pronouns in Afrikaans: A double questionnaire-based study. Language Sciences 691. 1–29.
Van Olmen, Daniël, Adri Breed & Ben Verhoeven. 2019. A corpus-based study of the human impersonal pronoun (’n) mens in Afrikaans: Compared to men and een mens in Dutch. Languages in Contrast 19(1). 79–105.
Weerman, Fred. 2006. It’s the economy, stupid: Een vergelijkende blik op men en man
[It’s the economy, stupid: A comparative look at men en man
]. In Matthias Hüning, Ulrike Vogl, Ton van der Wouden & Arie Verhagen (eds.), Nederlands tussen Duits en Engels [Dutch between German and English], 19–47. Leiden: Stichting Neerlandistiek Leiden.
Zifonun, Gisela. 2001.
Man lebt nur einmal: Morphosyntax und Semantik des Pronomens man
. Deutsche Sprache 28(3). 232–253.
Zobel, Sarah. 2016. A pragmatic analysis of German impersonally used first person singular ich
. Pragmatics 26(3). 379–416.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Breed, Adri & Daniel Van Olmen
Breed, Adri & Daniël Van Olmen
Fastrich, Bridgit
Rădulescu, Valentin & Daniël Van Olmen
2022. A questionnaire-based study of impersonalization in Romanian and English. Languages in Contrast 22:1 ► pp. 1 ff.
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.
