In this chapter, Gijsbert Rutten, Iris Van de Voorde and Rik Vosters, refine the Labovian distinction based primarily on the type of language learning involved by bringing in the contact-based... Show moreIn this chapter, Gijsbert Rutten, Iris Van de Voorde and Rik Vosters, refine the Labovian distinction based primarily on the type of language learning involved by bringing in the contact-based insights of Milroy (2007) on this issue. Exploring the extent to which the transmission-diffusion distinction can also apply to orthographic, rather than phonological or morphosyntactic, changes, the authors discuss a range of different examples of both transmission and – various subtypes of – diffusion, mostly from Dutch, German and English. Their central argument is that diffusion must be seen as the dominant driver of orthographic change, but transmission-type changes are also possible in specific historical contexts, for instance in relation to explicit instruction in schools or in closely-knit social networks. Building on different examples and cases, the chapter also explains the link between diffusion and supralocalization, as local and regional spelling practices in medieval times give way to more supraregional writing traditions in postmedieval times. As such, these processes of geographical diffusion of innovations across communities often lay the ground work for later standardization efforts. However, by discussing a slightly more elaborate case study on spelling change and pluricentricity in Dutch language history, the authors show how the development of such supraregional writing traditions often leads not only to linguistic standardization, but also results in a linguistic landscape which can best be described as pluricentric, consisting of different national and regional normative centers from which innovations spread Show less
Over the centuries, the French language has had a lot of influence on the Dutch language. Thousands of words from French entered Dutch and apart from that, Dutch has borrowed morphological... Show moreOver the centuries, the French language has had a lot of influence on the Dutch language. Thousands of words from French entered Dutch and apart from that, Dutch has borrowed morphological elements such as suffixes from French. Moreover, it is assumed that the popularity of certain Dutch morphosyntactic constructions can be attributed to language contact with French. Despite the fact that histories of Dutch often speak of so-called ‘Frenchification’ because of these French influences, hardly any empirical research has been carried out so far on the actual influence of French on Dutch. The aim of this thesis is to provide insight into the influence that French had on the Dutch language between 1500 and 1900. This is done by means of corpus analyses with the diachronic Language of Leiden corpus, which comprises texts from Leiden from different social domains. The corpus analyses aim to trace the language changes in Dutch as a consequence of language contact with French on three language levels: lexicon, morphology, and morphosyntax. In this way, this thesis aims to contribute to a better understanding of the historical language contact between Dutch and French. Show less
In linguistic research, present-day Dutch has been characterized as a pluricentric language, meaning that there are multiple centers from where language norms spread. Within the Dutch language area... Show moreIn linguistic research, present-day Dutch has been characterized as a pluricentric language, meaning that there are multiple centers from where language norms spread. Within the Dutch language area, we can discern a center in the Northern Netherlands (the Randstad area) and the Southern Netherlands (around the province of Brabant). Traditional histories of the language suggest that pluricentricity for Dutch is a relatively recent phenomenon, dating back to the beginning of the 20th century. However, based on findings from empirical historical-linguistic research, we could expect to situate pluricentricity at least 100 years earlier in time. This dissertation therefore provides an in-depth study in which pluricentricity is put into a broader historical perspective.Through systematic corpus analyses, this dissertation aims to assess the usefulness of the modern concept of pluricentricity in Dutch language history. A total of six linguistic features is examined in the Historical Corpus of Dutch (HCD), a new multi-genre, diachronic corpus, involving central and peripheral regions in both the North and the South. Moreover, by integrating Northern and Southern varieties of Dutch in the study, and by mapping the interactions between the different regions, we want to lay the foundation for an integrated history of Dutch. Show less
This dissertation provides new insights into language variation and change in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Dutch. More specifically, it investigates whether and to what extent... Show moreThis dissertation provides new insights into language variation and change in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Dutch. More specifically, it investigates whether and to what extent official language policy measures exerted influence on actual language practice.During the nation-building period around 1800, the Northern Netherlands witnessed the introduction of a national language policy, which aimed at the spread of a homogeneous written standard variety of Dutch, symbolising 'the' nation. In concrete terms, these top-down endeavours resulted in the first official codification of the Dutch orthography (Siegenbeek 1804) and grammar (Weiland 1805). Despite marking a decisive turning point in the standardisation history of Dutch, the effectiveness of the so-called schrijftaalregeling 'written language regulation' has never been investigated empirically.Taking a historical-sociolinguistic approach, this dissertation aims to fill this research gap by examining the impact of language policy on patterns of variation and change. How successful was the schrijftaalregeling in disseminating the officialised norms across the population at large, as envisaged by the government? Making use of the newly compiled Going Dutch Corpus, a diachronic multi-genre corpus comprising more than 420,000 words of authentic usage data (private letters, diaries and travelogues, newspapers), a wide range of orthographic and morphosyntactic features is analysed. Show less
How did common people write in the late eighteenth century? Little is yet known on this topic, since our knowledge is mainly based on printed texts written by a small part of the (male) elite... Show moreHow did common people write in the late eighteenth century? Little is yet known on this topic, since our knowledge is mainly based on printed texts written by a small part of the (male) elite population. This dissertation __ written from a sociolinguistic point of view __ gives us new insights into late-eighteenth-century language use. For this purpose a large number of Dutch private letters has been used. These letters were captured by the English in times of warfare between the Dutch and the English and are still preserved at the National Archives in Kew (London). The research is based on a selection of approximately 400 letters, written between 1776 and 1784 by Dutch male and female letter writers from all social ranks. This study into late-eighteenth-century language variation can be regarded as a first broad exploration of this valuable material. Therefore various linguistic phenomena have been examined: forms of address, negation, reflexivity and reciprocity, schwa-apocope, deletion of final -n, diminutives and the genitive and alternative constructions. The case studies clearly establish more variety in eighteenth-century written language than previous studies suggested. Almost every linguistic feature under discussion appears to show social variation, and gender and social class, in particular, are influential factors. Show less
In the National Archives in Kew, London, a treasure is kept which is of great importance for the history of the Dutch language: a collection of seventeenth-century letters written by men and women... Show moreIn the National Archives in Kew, London, a treasure is kept which is of great importance for the history of the Dutch language: a collection of seventeenth-century letters written by men and women from various social backgrounds. Given the fact that much of the linguistic research of seventeenth-century Dutch has been perforce based on printed texts and linguistic data produced by a relatively small number of upper-class __ usually male __ writers, not much is known with certainty about the everyday Dutch of seventeenth-century lower- and middle-class people. The letters hidden in the National Archives can change this. In this dissertation, a corpus of 595 letters written between 1664 and 1672 is examined from a sociolinguistic perspective. The topics treated are: forms of address, reflexivity and reciprocity, negation, schwa-apocope, diminutives, and the genitive and alternative constructions. The case studies show that there was still a lot of variation in seventeenth-century Dutch and that some linguistic changes had not progressed as far in the everyday Dutch of __ordinary__ people as previous research has suggested. Furthermore, it is shown that gender and social class are important factors of influence on the seventeenth-century language use, especially when interpreted in terms of education and writing experience. Show less
The American-born Quaker Lindley Murray (1745–1826) arguably was the most influential English language grammarian; undeniably he was the best-selling one. Murray was the author of the English... Show moreThe American-born Quaker Lindley Murray (1745–1826) arguably was the most influential English language grammarian; undeniably he was the best-selling one. Murray was the author of the English Grammar (1795), and between 1795 and the middle of the nineteenth century millions of copies were sold of this grammar alone, while several of his other textbooks were no less popular. In my dissertation, I paint a comprehensive portrait of this prolific writer, and I investigate how Murray’s Quakerism influenced his language use, by analysing a corpus of 262 of his unpublished private letters. In addition, I compared his own usage to the rules that he compiled for his English Grammar, to see whether Murray practiced what he preached. Show less
The eighteenth century was a key period in the establishment of standard modern English. This period, referred to as the Late Modern English period, witnessed the publication of an unprecedented... Show moreThe eighteenth century was a key period in the establishment of standard modern English. This period, referred to as the Late Modern English period, witnessed the publication of an unprecedented number of normative works aiming to define ‘correct’ English. Joseph Priestley (1733–1804) is best known as a scientist and theologian, but his Rudiments of English Grammar, first published in 1761 is an important work in the wave of English normative grammars of the late eighteenth century. Using a multi-disciplinary approach, this book investigates Priestley’s role as a codifier of the English language. The author demonstrates that the influence of Priestley’s grammar on the language has been underestimated and merits re-evaluation. Priestley’s ideas on grammar are related to his broader philosophical thinking. It is shown that, although Priestley is usually seen as one of the few descriptive grammarians of the period, his grammar also contains decidedly prescriptive elements, and that his adherence to the force of usage should be qualified. In addition, Priestley’s usage is compared to the rules in his grammar using a corpus of Priestley’s personal correspondence, created for this study. Show less
