Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Linguistics Vanguard

A Multimodal Journal for the Language Sciences

Editor-in-Chief: Bergs, Alexander / Cohn, Abigail C. / Good, Jeff


CiteScore 2018: 0.95

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.381
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.841

Online
ISSN
2199-174X
See all formats and pricing
More options …

How “deep” is Dynamism? Revisiting the evaluation of Moroccan-flavored Netherlandic Dutch

Stefan Grondelaers
  • Corresponding author
  • Radboud University Nijmegen, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Language Studies, Erasmusplein 1, Nijmegen 6500 HD, The Netherlands
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Paul van Gent
  • Radboud University Nijmegen, Faculty of Arts, Centre for Language Studies, Erasmusplein 1, Nijmegen 6500 HD, The Netherlands
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2019-04-16 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2018-0011

Abstract

In this paper we report a new speaker evaluation experiment to follow up on an earlier study, which found that the Moroccan accent of Netherlandic Standard Dutch was generally downgraded. As in the previous study, both traditional Superiority evaluations and modern Dynamism considerations (pertaining to media cool) were extracted, albeit with greater methodological care: we included a three-level accent strength variable in the stimuli, and measured Dynamism-evaluations on independently validated scales. While mildly accented Moroccan-Dutch speech was deemed less inferior than its strongly accented counterpart (though not as superior as any indigenous speech), Moroccan-flavoured speech was found to be the most dynamic in general. It is argued that the new data account for the increasing vitality of Moroccan-accented speech much better than previous findings, but also, and contrary to previous claims, that the Dynamism evaluations which power this vitality are not implicit or subconscious.

Keywords: implicitness; ethnic accent variation; standard language dynamics; language attitudes; traditional and modern prestige; speaker evaluation

References

  • CBS [Statistics Netherlands]. 2018. Bevolking, leeftijd, migratieachtergrond, geslacht en regio, 1 januari [Population, age, migration background, gender and region, januari 1]. https://opendata.cbs.nl/statline/#/CBS/nl/dataset/37713/table (accessed May 24 2018.)

  • Cornips, Leonie, Jürgen Jaspers & Vincent de Rooij. 2015. The politics of labelling youth vernaculars in the Netherlands and Belgium. In Jacomine Nortier & Bernte A. Svendsen (eds.), Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century: Linguistic Practices across Urban Spaces, 45–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Giles, Howard. 1971. Patterns of evaluation in reactions to RP, South Welsh, and Somerset accented speech. The British Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 10(3). 280–281.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Giles, Howard. 1972. The effect of stimulus mildness-broadness in the evaluation of accents. Language and Speech 15(3). 262–269.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan & Dirk Speelman. 2013. Can speaker evaluation return private attitudes towards stigmatised varieties? Evidence from emergent standardisation in Belgian Dutch. In Tore Kristiansen & Stefan Grondelaers (eds.), Language (de)standardisation in Late Modern Europe: Experimental studies, 171–191. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan & Dirk Speelman. 2015. A quantitative analysis of qualitative free response data. Paradox or new paradigm? In Jocelyne Daems, Eline Zenner, Kris Heylen, Dirk Speelman & Hubert Cuyckens (eds.), Change of Paradigms – New Paradoxes: Recontextualizing Language and Linguistics, 361–384. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Dirk Speelman, Chloé Lybaert & Paul van Gent. ms. Getting a (big) data-based grip on ideological change. Evidence from Belgian Dutch.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Paul van Gent & Roeland Van Hout. 2015a. Is Moroccan-flavoured Standard Dutch standard or not? On the use of perceptual criteria to determine the limits of standard languages. In Alexei Prikhodkine & Dennis R. Preston (eds.), Language attitudes: Variability, Processes and Outcomes (Impact. Studies on Language and Society 39), 191–218. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Roeland Van Hout & Sander Van der Harst. 2015b. Subjective accent strength perceptions are not only a function of objective accent strength. Evidence from Netherlandic Standard Dutch. Speech Communication 74, 1–11.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Paul van Gent & Roeland Van Hout. In press. On the inevitability of social meaning and ideology in accounts of syntactic change. Evidence from pronoun competition in Netherlandic Dutch. In Tanya Karoli Christensen & Torben Juel Jensen (eds.), Explanations in Sociosyntax: Dialogue across paradigms. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan & Roeland Van Hout. 2010. Is Standard Dutch with a regional accent standard or not? Evidence from native speakers’ attitudes. Language Variation and Change 22(2). 221–239.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Roeland Van Hout & Dirk Speelman. 2011. A perceptual typology of standard language situations in the Low Countries. In Tore Kristiansen & Nikolas Coupland (eds.), Standard Languages and Language Standards in a Changing Europe, 199–222. Oslo: Novus.Google Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Roeland Van Hout & Mieke Steegs. 2010. Evaluating regional accent variation in Standard Dutch. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 29(1), 101–116.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Grondelaers, Stefan, Roeland Van Hout & Paul van Gent. 2019. Re-evaluating the prestige of regional accents in Netherlandic Standard Dutch. The role of accent strength and speaker gender. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 38(2), 215–236.Web of ScienceCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Kristiansen, Tore. 2009. The macro level social meaning of late modern Danish accents. Acta Linguistica Hafniensia [International Journal of Linguistics] 41(1). 167–192.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Marzo, Stefania & Stefan Grondelaers. 2018. Why do urban vernaculars leave their original habitat? Evidence from attitude research on Citétaal in Flanders. Paper presented at the international Urban Language Research conference. Graz. (November 3, 2018.)Google Scholar

  • Mulac, Anthony, Theodore D. Hanley & Diane Y. Prigge. 1974. Effects of phonological speech foreigness upon three dimensions of attitude of selected American listeners. Quarterly Journal of Speech 60(4). 411–420.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Nortier, Jacomien & Bernte A. Svendsen (eds). 2015. Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Osgood, Charles E., George J. Suci & Percy H. Tannenbaum. 1957. The measurement of meaning. Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar

  • Pinget, Anne-France, Marjolein Rotteveel & Hans Van de Velde. 2014. Standaardnederlands met een accent – Herkenning en evaluatie van regionaal gekleurd Standaardnederlands in Nederland. Nederlandse Taalkunde 19(1). 3–45.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Rosseel, Laura. 2017. New approaches to measuring the social meaning of language variation: exploring the Personalized Implicit Association Test and the Relational Responding Task. Leuven: KU Leuven doctoral dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Svendsen, Bernte A. 2015. Language, youth and identity in the 21st century: content and continuations. In Jacomine Nortier & Bernte A. Svendsen (eds.), Language, Youth and Identity in the 21st Century: Linguistic Practices across Urban Spaces, 3–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

  • Van Leeuwen, David, Frans Hinskens, Borja Martinovic, Arjan Van Hessen, Stefan Grondelaers & Rosemary Orr. 2016. Sprekend Nederland: a heterogeneous speech data collection. Computational Linguistics in The Netherlands 6. 21–38.Google Scholar

  • Van Meel, Linda. 2016. The roots of ethnolects. A sociophonological study in Amsterdam and Nijmegen. Nijmegen: Radboud University Ph.D. dissertation.Google Scholar

  • Williams, Frederick. 1970. Psychological correlates of speech characteristics: On sounding “disadvantaged”. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 13(3). 472–488.PubMedCrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Zahn, Christopher & Robert Hopper. 1985. Measuring language attitude: the speech evaluation instrument. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 4(2). 113–123.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Received: 2018-06-15

Accepted: 2018-12-13

Published Online: 2019-04-16


Citation Information: Linguistics Vanguard, Volume 5, Issue s1, 20180011, ISSN (Online) 2199-174X, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2018-0011.

Export Citation

©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in