Journal articles on the topic 'Limburgish language'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Limburgish language.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 32 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Limburgish language.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Cornips, Leonie. "The impact of preschool attendance on children's bidialectism in The Netherlands: Why toddlers may stop speaking a regional language (Limburgish) at home." Language in Society 49, no. 3 (May 18, 2020): 333–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0047404520000275.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis article addresses the question as to why toddlers in The Netherlands may stop speaking their regional language—Limburgish—as their home language after entering preschool, even when both parents speak Limburgish at home. The question is addressed through the concept of the total linguistic fact (Silverstein 1985): language ideology, language choice, and language practices mutually shape and inform each other. Language ideologies in wider society impact educational practices in preschool. Hierarchical teacher-child and influential peer interactions show the negative effects of speaking Limburgish. Preschool language socialization practices have a profound effect on language choice and shift by toddlers at home who are still in the midst of their linguistic, pragmatic, cognitive, and social development of both Limburgish and Dutch as first languages. (Regional language, language ideology, preschool)
2
Jongbloed-Faber, Lysbeth, Jolie van Loo, and Leonie Cornips. "Regional languages on Twitter." Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 6, no. 2 (December 30, 2017): 174–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/dujal.16017.jon.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper addressed the question how the use of Dutch and the regional languages Frisian or Limburgish differ on Twitter and which patterns in language choice can be identified. Previous quantitative studies (Jongbloed-Faber, Van de Velde, Van der Meer & Klinkenberg, 2016; Nguyen, Trieschnigg & Cornips, 2015; Trieschnigg, 2015) have already shown that people in the Dutch provinces of Friesland and Limburg tweet in Frisian or Limburgish respectively, but most often in Dutch interspersed with some English. In this qualitative study, we compared the tweets from twenty twitterers in Friesland and Limburg who use both Dutch and Frisian or Limburgish regularly in order to get insight into their language use patterns. The following patterns in language use were identified: when a twitterer aims to maximise his/her audience, Dutch is regularly employed. However, as soon as an interpersonal, addressed tweet is formulated, Frisian or Limburgish is often used. General tweets in Dutch may therefore very well get a Frisian or Limburgish continuation. Another mechanism frequently found in responding tweets is following the language used in the original tweet, notwithstanding such a tweet was in Dutch or in a regional language. Finally, the data show that, although Twitter is a global medium which can be accessed at any time and any place provided that one has access to the needed technical equipment and Internet connection, twitterers sometimes construct localness i.e. what is perceived as local culture through using Frisian or Limburgish exclusively.
3
Assendelft, Brenda. "De codificatie van het Limburgs : Motieven en hun patronen." Taal en Tongval 71, no. 1 (December 1, 2019): 1–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/tet2019.1.asse.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The codification of Limburgish: motives and their patternsLimburgish, the regional language spoken in the Dutch and Belgian provinces of Limburg, shows characteristics of standardization: from the nineteenth century onwards, an increasing number of dictionaries, grammars, and spelling guides of various Limburgish dialects have been published. This shows that Limburgish undergoes codification, one of the major aspects in standardization processes. This article explores the codification process of Limburgish. First, an overview is given of the various codification materials to be found for the dialects spoken in the Dutch province of Limburg. An investigation of the introductory parts of these materials is conducted to answer the question what motives the authors of the various publications have to codify a particular Limburgish dialect. It appears that the amount of codification materials increases drastically from approximately 1980 onwards, and that the motives concerned with dialect protection or preservation prevail in the publications after the Second World War, suggesting that the decline of active dialect use in the last decades is an important motive for the codification of the dialects of Limburg.
4
Ulianitckaia, Liubov. "The French Flemish dialect in the context of language situation of Belgium and France." Scandinavian Philology 19, no. 2 (2021): 336–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu21.2021.207.
Full textAbstract:
This article addresses the historical language variants of Flanders, spoken both within and outside the region. The linguistic diversity of officially Dutch-speaking Flanders is represented by Limburgish, West Flemish, Brabantian, and East Flemish dialects, with Limburgish and West Flemish being entitled to the status of a distinct language. (Limburgish is recognized as a regional language in the Netherlands.) This paper reviews some sociolinguistic and political features of Flanders, acknowledging the area of West Flemish dialect group use. Special emphasis is placed on the French Flemish dialect, present in the territories of France and Belgium. This dialect is one of the most archaic West Flemish dialects that suffered a profound impact from French and other neighboring languages. The lexical and grammatical features of French Flemish are examined. It is noted that code switching is common for the French Flemish dialect. Some of the French Flemish syntax features related to the antecedent phenomena are explained via the binomiality idea, that states any verbal or substantive part of a sentence be composed of two parts, the first of which can be modified. Some syntax phenomena of French Flemish could be the result of grammatical interference between the West Flemish dialect and the French language. The paper also touches on the French Flemish support actions taken by France and Belgium, and discusses French Flemish seceding from West Flemish dialect group and acquiring a special status, that could be a status of a distinct language.
5
Driessen, Geert. "Ontwikkelingen In Het Gebruik Van Streektalen En Dialecten In De Periode 1995-2003." Toegepaste Taalwetenschap in Artikelen 75 (January 1, 2006): 103–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ttwia.75.10dri.
Full textAbstract:
Usage of Dutch regional languages and dialects is very much in decline in favour of usage of standard Dutch. This paper analyses the developments in usage in the period 1995-2003 using data from five measurement points of the national cohort study Primai y Education (PRIMA). A total of 35,000 pupils and their parents were involved in this study. In addition, this paper analyses the relationship between usage of regional languages and dialects on the one hand and a number of family demographical characteristics and the children's Dutch language proficiency on the other. The results show that it is imperative to treat the Netherlands not as a whole but to differentiate between language areas. In contrast to the other regional languages and dialects the future of Limburgish seems less gloomy.
6
Blom, Elma. "Lexical and cognitive development of children learning regional languages: Studies from the Netherlands." Nordlyd 47, no. 2 (December 21, 2023): 5–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.7557/12.7267.
Full textAbstract:
Regional language speakers are subject to negative social judgments. In this contribution, I provide an overview of research in the Netherlands with children who are regional language learners against the backdrop of this deficit perspective. Findings on the lexical and cognitive development of children from Fryslân, a northern Dutch province, and Limburg, a southern Dutch province, demonstrate that regional language acquisition is neither associated with language delays nor with any cognitive difficulties. Linguistic overlap between Frisian and Limburgish, on the one hand, and Dutch, on the other hand, results in ample opportunities to share linguistic resources, experiences, and knowledge. Especially unbalanced children benefit from this cross-linguistic overlap because they can make use of their stronger language to perform in the weaker language. Cross-linguistic regularities between the regional and national language are helpful and support performance in the regional language. Results on cognitive effects suggest that regional language learners have some selective attention advantages. Although significant, the effects are small, the advantages do not last long, and they require sufficient exposure to and proficiency in the regional language.
7
Franco, Karlien, Dirk Geeraerts, Dirk Speelman, and Roeland Van Hout. "Concept characteristics and variation in lexical diversity in two Dutch dialect areas." Cognitive Linguistics 30, no. 1 (February 25, 2019): 205–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cog-2017-0136.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractLexical diversity, the amount of lexical variation shown by a particular concept, varies between concepts. For the conceptdrunk, for instance, nearly 3000 English expressions exist, includingblitzed, intoxicated, andhammered. For the conceptsober, however, a significantly smaller number of lexical items is available, likesoberorabstinent. While earlier variation studies have revealed that meaning-related concept characteristics correlate with the amount of lexical variation, these studies were limited in scope, being restricted to one semantic field and to one dialect area, that of the Limburgish dialects of Dutch. In this paper, we investigate whether the impact of concept characteristics, viz. vagueness, lack of salience and proneness to affect, is manifest in a similar way in other dialects and other semantic fields. In particular, by extending the scope of the earlier studies to other carefully selected semantic fields, we investigate the generalizability of the impact of concept characteristics to the lexicon as a whole. The quantitative approach that we employ to measure concept characteristics and lexical diversity methodologically advances the study of linguistic variation. Theoretically, this paper contributes to the further development of Cognitive Sociolinguistics by showcasing how meaning can be a source of lexical diversity.
8
Ulianitckaia, L. A., and A. A. Shumkov. "The Main Germanic Dialects of Flanders." Discourse 6, no. 6 (January 15, 2021): 137–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2020-6-6-137-153.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction. The article reveals a complicated language situation in the Flemish region of Belgium - a progressing extinction of Germanic dialects, which are historically spread on this territory. Each dialectal group has its unique features, and the West-Flemish and Limburgish groups might have become grounds for particular languages.Methodology and sources. The methodological base consists in a complex approach, combining the comparative-historical and contrastive methods with the method of sociolinguistic interpretation. The investigation is conducted on the language material, collected from different dialectal dictionaries of Dutch, as well as from special linguistic papers on the language situation in Flanders.Results and discussion. The article represents a multiplicity of Germanic dialects, existing on the territory of modern Flanders. A short revue is given on lexical and grammatical peculiarities of four main dialectal groups, as well as on their peculiar phonetics. A special attention is, respectively, paid to the urban dialects of Antwerp, Gent, Bruges and Hasselt. There are analyzed some interferential phenomena, caused by the contact of the investigated dialects with Romanic and Germanic environment and occurring on all language levels - from phonetic to the syntactic ones. It has been suggested, that certain specific grammar forms in Flemish dialects may be result of phonetic interference. For Marols, which originally belongs to the group of Brabant dialects, the juncture between Germanic morphosyntactic structure and Roman lexis is discussed.Conclusion. For the last 20 years the percentage of persons, speaking the Germanic dialects of Flanders, has demonstrated a catastrophic decrease. Along with that, the main features of these dialects (mostly of the Brabant ones) have gone over to an intermediate language “tussentaal”, in both lexis and grammar. This language is being formed inbetween the Germanic dialects and Dutch; the latter is represented in the Flemish region by two variants – standard (common) Dutch and Belgian Dutch. The progressing decrease in the number of persons, speaking the autochthonous dialects of Flanders, is thoughtprovoking towards the exigency to fix the disappearing language variants through a strict scientific way.
9
RAMACHERS, STEFANIE, SUSANNE BROUWER, and PAULA FIKKERT. "No perceptual reorganization for Limburgian tones? A cross-linguistic investigation with 6- to 12-month-old infants." Journal of Child Language 45, no. 2 (June 15, 2017): 290–318. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000917000228.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractDespite the fact that many of the world's languages use lexical tone, the majority of language acquisition studies has focused on non-tone languages. Research on tone languages has typically investigated well-known tone languages such as Mandarin and Cantonese Chinese. The current study looked at a Limburgian dialect of Dutch that uses lexical pitch differences, albeit in a rather restricted way. Using a visual habituation paradigm, 6- to 12-month-old Limburgian and Dutch infants were tested for their ability to discriminate Limburgian tones. The results showed that both Limburgian and Dutch infants discriminate the Limburgian tones throughout their first year of life. The role of linguistic experience, acoustic salience, and the degree of similarity to the native prosodic system are discussed.
10
Piepers, Joske, and Theresa Redl. "Gender-mismatching pronouns in context." Linguistics in the Netherlands 35 (December 3, 2018): 97–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/avt.00007.pie.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Gender-(mis)matching pronouns have been studied extensively in experiments. However, a phenomenon common to various languages has thus far been overlooked: the systemic use of non-feminine pronouns when referring to female individuals. The present study is the first to provide experimental insights into the interpretation of such a pronoun: Limburgian zien ‘his/its’ and Dutch zijn ‘his/its’ are grammatically ambiguous between masculine and neuter, but while Limburgian zien can refer to women, the Dutch equivalent zijn cannot. Employing an acceptability judgment task, we presented speakers of Limburgian (N = 51) with recordings of sentences in Limburgian featuring zien, and speakers of Dutch (N = 52) with Dutch translations of these sentences featuring zijn. All sentences featured a potential male or female antecedent embedded in a stereotypically male or female context. We found that ratings were higher for sentences in which the pronoun could refer back to the antecedent. For Limburgians, this extended to sentences mentioning female individuals. Context further modulated sentence appreciation. Possible mechanisms regarding the interpretation of zien as coreferential with a female individual will be discussed.
11
Jacobs, Haike. "A sightseeing diminutive tour in Limburgian." Linguistics in the Netherlands 40 (November 3, 2023): 105–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/avt.00082.jac.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper provides an overview, based on the MAND database and on additional recordings for Limburgian Panningen, of diminutive formation in Limburgian and focuses on the status of n-assimilation. It is shown that both the presence and the absence of n-assimilaton poses problems both for existing phonological descriptions as well as for constraint-based approaches to phonology such as standard Optimality Theory. We will show that the nature of the three interacting modifications, that is n-assimilation, k-fronting and s-insertion is different. k-fronting and s-insertion are limited in their application to the diminutive suffix and are as such lexical modifications. n-assimilation is shown to apply also across word boundaries and is a post-lexical modification. This allows for a straightforward description in stratal OT and for a better understanding of the data observed.
12
Piepers, Joske, Ad Backus, and Jos Swanenberg. "Is ‘he’ still here?" Linguistics in the Netherlands 40 (November 3, 2023): 194–209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/avt.00087.pie.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Various non-standard language varieties in the Netherlands traditionally allow for the use of masculine personal subject pronouns (i.e. regionally distinct variants of hij ‘he’) in reference to women. While this practice is well-documented within Dutch dialectology, especially during the twentieth century, it is unclear to what extent this feature still exists nowadays. Moreover, the use of masculine subject forms for female reference has not previously been described for Limburgian dialects. This paper offers a start to filling these gaps, by providing insight into the contemporary use of ‘he’ for women in Dutch dialects, with a specific focus on occurrences in Dutch Limburg. We report on a Twitter query and three interviews, showing (i) that the use of ‘he’ for women still exists in various Dutch dialects, and (ii) how native speakers of a Limburgian dialect use and perceive this feature of their dialect.
13
Piepers, Joske, Ad Backus, and Jos Swanenberg. "‘It’ Is Not for Everyone: Variation in Speakers’ Evaluation of Sociopragmatic Pronouns in Limburgian." Languages 8, no. 4 (October 25, 2023): 253. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/languages8040253.
Full textAbstract:
This paper explores the different ways in which speakers of Limburgian think and feel about sociopragmatic pronouns in their dialect, in which women can traditionally be referred to with both ziej ‘she’ and het ‘she’ (lit. ‘it’). Previous research revealed variation between speakers regarding the use of het, which appears to be associated with differences in interpretation and evaluation. This study investigates this further by analyzing how individual speakers evaluate non-feminine pronouns for women. Our data show that many speakers have a relatively high level of awareness, discussing four key themes: (i) how female reference in Limburgian differs from that of Dutch; (ii) the appropriateness of using the pronouns for certain referents and/or in certain social situations; (iii) the various connotations the pronouns may have; and (iv) how they navigate between-speaker differences regarding pronoun evaluation in daily life. Importantly, this high level of awareness is not present in all speakers. These results indicate that the use or non-use of the pronoun het for female referents may be conditioned by cognitive automaticity for some speakers, and by a conscious, emotionally charged consideration about its desirability for others. Our findings, therefore, suggest the importance of integrating cognition and sociality in linguistic theorizing.
14
de Vaan, Michiel. "Das limburgische Konverb als Relikt der prädikativen Adjektivflexion." Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 90, no. 2 (2023): 244–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.25162/zdl-2023-0008.
Full text
15
Piepers, Joske, Ad Backus, and Jos Swanenberg. "Ziej is a woman and het is a girl." Taal en Tongval 73, no. 1 (September 1, 2021): 1–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.5117/tet2021.1.piep.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract In this paper, we report on a study of gender reference in Limburgian, specifically the use of the neuter subject pronoun het ‘she’ (lit. ‘it’) to refer to a female referent. This pronoun is used in addition to the feminine pronoun ze ‘she’. We investigate the role of the referent’s social and grammatical characteristics in the variation between grammatically feminine and ‘non-feminine’ (nf; i.e., neuter and masculine) pronouns in two experiments. First, we test the effect of a referent’s age in a language production study, in which 41 native speakers participated. The results of this study indicate that speakers use het more often to refer to younger than to older women. Second, we use an acceptability judgment task (N = 72) to assess whether the preference for non-feminine pronouns for younger women might be explained by grammatical agreement with non-feminine antecedent nouns (e.g., grammatically neuter maedje ‘girl’). The results indicate that this is not the case: het is preferred as a pronoun for younger but not older women, regardless of an antecedent noun’s grammatical gender. We conclude that the variation in pronoun gender in Limburgian is a socio-pragmatic phenomenon, and we offer suggestions for future research in this area.
16
Cornips, Leonie, and Vincent De Rooij. "Belonging through Languagecultural Practices in the Periphery." Anthropological Journal of European Cultures 24, no. 1 (March 1, 2015): 83–101. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/ajec.2015.240106.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, we will present two case studies of language and cultural practices that are part of or strongly related to carnival, in the Dutch peripheral province of Limburg, and more precisely in the southern Limburgian city of Heerlen, which in turn is considered peripheral vis-à-vis the provincial capital Maastricht. We will consider carnival as a political force field in which opposing language and cultural practices are involved in the production of belonging as an official, public-oriented 'formal structure' of membership, and belonging as a personal, intimate feeling of being 'at home' in a place (place-belongingness) (Antonsich 2010; Yuval-Davis 2006). In the case studies presented here, we take seriously the idea that ideology, linguistic form and the situated use of language are dialectically related (Silverstein 1985). In doing so, we wish to transcend disciplinary boundaries between anthropology and (socio)linguistics in Europe.
17
Hermans, Ben. "On the representation of quasi-long vowels in Dutch and Limburgian." Linguistics in the Netherlands 9 (September 3, 1992): 75–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/avt.9.09her.
Full text
18
Peters, Jörg. "The dialect of Hasselt." Journal of the International Phonetic Association 36, no. 1 (May 18, 2006): 117–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0025100306002428.
Full textAbstract:
Hasselt is the capital of the Belgian province of Limburg, with a population of some 68,000. The town is situated in the northern part of Belgium, about 35 km west of the national border between Belgium and the Netherlands, and 20 km north of the Dutch-French language border, which separates Belgium into a northern part (Flanders) and a southern part (Wallonia). The dialect of Hasselt belongs to the West-Limburgian dialect group (Goossens 1965). The number of dialect speakers is steadily diminishing, and the remaining ones are all bilingual with Standard Belgian Dutch (cf. Verhoeven 2005). An early comprehensive description of this dialect is given by Grootaers & Grauls (1930). The only available dictionary is Staelens (1989).
19
Gussenhoven, Carlos, and Flor Aarts. "The dialect of Maastricht." Journal of the International Phonetic Association 29, no. 2 (December 1999): 155–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0025100300006526.
Full textAbstract:
Maastricht (Mosae Trajectum in Roman times) is the capital of the Dutch province of Limburg and one of the oldest cities in the Netherlands. Situated in the extreme south, close to the Belgian border, the city is fairly small, with a population of just over 120,000. Maastricht enjoys a world-wide reputation as the place where the Maastricht Treaty was signed in 1992. The dialect of Maastricht belongs to the south-eastern dialect group (Weijnen 1966: §§ 166, 173), which shares a number of properties with dialects in Belgium and Germany. A more recent classification (Belemans, Kruijsen & van Keymeulen 1998) assigns the dialect to Central Limburgian, which comprises seven subgroups in the Netherlands and Belgium, more particularly to Trichterlands. Two earlier descriptions are Houben (1905), which is historically oriented, and van Buuren (1991).
20
Pauwels, Anne. "Diglossia, immigrant dialects and language maintenance in Australia: The case of limburgs and Swabian." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 7, no. 1 (January 1986): 13–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01434632.1986.9994227.
Full text
21
De Vaan, Michiel. "Paragogic -ә in Limburgian: Vowel addition due to a word-final rising tone." Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 76, no. 3 (2009): 309–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.25162/zdl-2009-0011.
Full text
22
Fournier, Rachel, Jo Verhoeven, Marc Swerts, and Carlos Gussenhoven. "Perceiving word prosodic contrasts as a function of sentence prosody in two Dutch Limburgian dialects." Journal of Phonetics 34, no. 1 (January 2006): 29–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wocn.2005.03.002.
Full text
23
Delbroek, Bart. "De arbeidsvoorziening in de Limburgse steenkoolmijnen: werving en logistiek van de pendelarbeid (1901-1966)." Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire 97, no. 4 (2019): 1277–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.3406/rbph.2019.9375.
Full text
24
Janssenswillen, Paul. "Vernederlandsing voor de eindstreep? De taalsituatie in het middelbaar onderwijs voor jongens in Limburg tijdens het interbellum." WT. Tijdschrift over de geschiedenis van de Vlaamse beweging 68, no. 2 (January 1, 2009): 119–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/wt.v68i2.12423.
Full textAbstract:
In juli 1932 bekwamen de Vlamingen een wettelijke regeling voor de lang nagestreefde vernederlandsing van het middelbaar onderwijs. Op basis van het taalregime in het middelbaar onderwijs voor jongens in Limburg tijdens het interbellum onderzochten we de context waarin de taalwet tot stand kwam en of ze ook effectief een einde maakte aan de verfransing van dat onderwijsniveau.Zowel de taalvoorschriften die de Luikse bisschop Rutten in 1919 voor zijn Limburgse colleges uitvaardigde als die van de opeenvolgende ministers voor het rijksonderwijs, kenden tweetaligheid als norm. De toepassing ervan leverde geen eenduidig beeld. Factoren zoals de ligging van de school ten opzichte van de taalgrens en een verfranste stad of industriële omgeving en de aanwezigheid van Waalse leerlingen hadden een sterke impact op de graad en het tempo van vernederlandsing. Een onvolledige humanioracyclus en het ontbreken van een concurrerende school van het andere onderwijsnet beïnvloedden de positie van de moedertaal in gunstige zin. Daarentegen konden verzet tegen de voortschrijdende vernederlandsing vanuit invloedrijke kringen, een Fransvriendelijke houding van de directie en het gebrek aan Nederlandse taalkennis van individuele leraren de verbetering van het taalregime afremmen.Hoewel het een mijlpaal was door de invoering van de officiële eentaligheid in Vlaanderen, betekende de taalwet van 1932 niet meteen het einde van het Franstalig middelbaar onderwijs in Limburg. De bestaande Franstalige secties mochten ingericht blijven zolang ze voldeden aan bepaalde minimumvoorwaarden wat betreft leerlingenaantallen. In het Koninklijk Atheneum te Tongeren werd de Franstalige afdeling pas in 1951 opgedoekt, in het Klein Seminarie in Sint-Truiden gebeurde dat in 1961, bijna 30 jaar na de invoering van de taalwet op het middelbaar onderwijs.________Dutchification before the finishing line. The language situation in secondary education for boys in Limburg during the interbellum periodIn July 1932 the Flemish finally obtained a statutory regulation for the long pursued Dutchification of secondary education. Based on the language regime in secondary education for boys in Limburg during the interbellum period we investigated the context in which the language law came about, and whether it actually ended the Gallicisation of that level of education.Both the language regulations issued by bishop Rutten of Liege in 1919 for his colleagues in Limburg as well as those issued by the successive ministers for national education regarded bilingualism as the prevailing standard . The application of the regulations did not produce an unequivocal result. Factors such as the location of the school in reference to the linguistic border or a Gallicised city or industrial environment as well as the presence of Walloon pupils had a strong impact on the degree and the speed of the Dutchification. If the course of education of the humanities was not complete or if there was no competing school of the other educational system, then this had a positive impact on the position of the native language. On the other hand, the resistance by influential groups against the progress of Dutchification, a pro-French attitude by the school board and the deficiency in the knowledge of the Dutch language of individual teachers could hold back the improvement of the language regime.Although the language law of 1932 signified a landmark because it introduced unilingualism in Flanders, it did not immediately put an end to secondary education in French in Limburg. The existing French speaking departments could carry on as long as they complied with certain minimal requirements in reference to numbers of pupils. The French speaking department of the Royal Grammar School of Tongres was not shut down until 1951 and that of the Preparatory Seminary in Saint Trond not until 1961, almost 30 years after the introduction of the language law for secondary education.
25
Morillo Morales, Gino, and Leonie Cornips. "Minoritising a regional language in multilingual preschools in Dutch Limburg: Teachers’ and toddlers’ choices between Dutch and Limburgish." International Journal of Bilingualism, April 8, 2022, 136700692210793. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/13670069221079335.
Full textAbstract:
Aims and objectives: We discuss how children with various language backgrounds interact in preschool playgrounds in Limburg, the Netherlands. This paper addresses the question how power dynamics between Dutch and/or Limburgish, and other languages are enacted in, by, and through language choice in preschool settings, and to what extent this leads to social (in)equality. Approach: This paper incorporates data collected during ethnographic fieldwork and discusses literature about language socialisation, multilingualism, and language policy. Data and analysis: All data were collected at three preschools in Southern Limburg with over 30 children and more than five teachers. The data were analysed using various theoretical perspectives. Findings and conclusions: We conclude that the ways in which, when, how, and in which activities children and teachers select languages show a social order. This order renders Limburgish and other languages than Dutch unequal in the earliest educational setting that children encounter. No concrete language policy has been developed for children who speak other home languages than Dutch and/or Limburgish. Children discover quickly that using Dutch is more important than other languages in the preschool. Consequently, children, as individual agents, will start acting accordingly. Originality: Through its ethnographical approach, this paper offers a unique insight in the multilingual landscape including regional language use at preschools in Southern Limburg. This approach is based on actual, observed behaviour instead of reported behaviour or behaviour stipulated by language policies. Significance/implications: The initial stimulus for this research is societal: 60.8% of the Limburgish participants in a study reported to speak Limburgish, yet this amount is decreasing, and concerned parents and municipalities requested insights why their children prefer Dutch over Limburgish at home soon after attending preschool. This research aims to provide answers why this happens and how to ensure a more linguistically equal preschool.
26
Schmeets, Hans, and Leonie Cornips. "Het belang van taalkeuze voor het sociaal kapitaal in Nederland." Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics 12 (November 17, 2023). http://dx.doi.org/10.51751/dujal13267.
Full textAbstract:
This article focuses on how language choice and how the language (variety) spoken at home contributes to social capital in the Netherlands. Social capital is measured using 17 participation and trust indicators, based on a representative Dutch national survey on social cohesion and well-being among more than 7,500 people aged 15 years or older in 2019. Our study shows that if a dialect or the regional language Low Saxon is most often spoken at home, individuals’ trust level is lower, while participation is higher compared to the group that most often uses Dutch at home. Limburgish and Frisian are not related to trust and/or participation. Crucially, this study reveals that the social capital index overall is not related to language but the two parts of it: trust and participation.
27
Belmar, Guillem, and Sara Pinho. "‘Kinsto it Frysk ferstean?’." Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, October 16, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/dujal.19034.bel.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract West Frisian is a minoritized language spoken in the province of Fryslân, in the Netherlands. It has been said to be converging with Standard Dutch (see De Haan, 1997; Nerbonne, 2001), and it has been found to be largely intelligible for speakers of regional language varieties in the Netherlands, such as Low Saxon or Limburgish for example (see, for instance, De Vries, 2010). In this research, we tested how much Frisian native speakers of Dutch can actually understand, as well as the degree of difficulty of each type of task. An online test was designed (N = 225) to measure the intelligibility of both written and spoken Frisian. The results seem to indicate that West Frisian is highly intelligible for Dutch native speakers, which we argue should be used to enrich the school curriculum and foster receptive skills in the minoritized language (see Fonseca, 2012; Belmar, 2019b), which could in turn boost its use.
28
Huisman, John L. A., Karlien Franco, and Roeland van Hout. "Linking Linguistic and Geographic Distance in Four Semantic Domains: Computational Geo-Analyses of Internal and External Factors in a Dialect Continuum." Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence 4 (June 4, 2021). http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/frai.2021.668035.
Full textAbstract:
Dialectometry studies patterns of linguistic variation through correlations between geographic and aggregate measures of linguistic distance. However, aggregating smooths out the role of semantic characteristics, which have been shown to affect the distribution of lexical variants across dialects. Furthermore, although dialectologists have always been well-aware of other variables like population size, isolation and socio-demographic features, these characteristics are generally only included in dialectometric analyses afterwards for further interpretation of the results rather than as explanatory variables. This study showcases linear mixed-effects modelling as a method that is able to incorporate both language-external and language-internal factors as explanatory variables of linguistic variation in the Limburgish dialect continuum in Belgium and the Netherlands. Covering four semantic domains that vary in their degree of basic vs. cultural vocabulary and their degree of standardization, the study models linguistic distances using a combination of external (e.g., geographic distance, separation by water, population size) and internal (semantic density, salience) sources of variation. The results show that both external and internal factors contribute to variation, but that the exact role of each individual factor differs across semantic domains. These findings highlight the need to incorporate language-internal factors in studies on variation, as well as a need for more comprehensive analysis tools to help better understand its patterns.
29
Cajot, J. "Blancquaert en Stevens: Fonetiek versus fonologie in de Limburgse Dialectatlas." Handelingen van de Koninklijke Commissie voor Toponymie en Dialectologie 86, no. 1 (February 20, 2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/hctd.88763.
Full text
30
PAUWELS, ANNE. "Diglossic communities in transition: the cases of the Limburgs and Swabian speech communities in Australia." International Journal of the Sociology of Language 1988, no. 72 (1988). http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1988.72.85.
Full text
31
Goossens, J. "De oorsprong van de Rijnlands-Limburgse tweetonigheid: Een analyse met bijzondere aandacht voor de korte klinkers voor obstruent." Handelingen van de Koninklijke Commissie voor Toponymie en Dialectologie 89, no. 1 (February 20, 2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/hctd.88800.
Full text
32
Bruyère, Véronique, and Michel Rigo. "Foreword to the special issue dedicated to the tenth ''Journées montoises d'informatique théorique''." Discrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science Vol. 9 no. 2 (January 1, 2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.46298/dmtcs.396.
Full textAbstract:
Held at the Institute of Mathematics of the University of Liège, Liège, September 8―11, 2004 International audience This special issue of Discrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science is dedicated to the tenth "Journées montoises d'informatique théorique" conference (Mons theoretical computer science days) which was held, for the first time, at the Institute of Mathematics of the University of Liège, Belgium, From 8th to 11th September 2004. Previous editions of this conference took place in Mons 1990, 1992, 1994, 1998, in Rouen 1991, in Bordeaux 1993, Marseille 1995, Marne-La-Vallée 2000 and Montpellier 2002.<p> This tenth edition can be considered as a widely international one. We were lucky to have almost 85 participants from fourteen different countries: Austria, Belgium, Burkina Faso, Canada, Czech republic, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, Norway, Poland and Portugal. The main proportion of researchers participating to this event was coming from France and Italy where a long tradition of combinatorics on words is well established. During four days, 42 contributed talks and 7 invited talks were given, the main topics being combinatorics on words, numeration systems, automata and formal languages theory, coding theory, verification, bio-informatics, number theory, grammars, text algorithms, symbolic dynamics and tilings. The invited speakers were: J. Cassaigne (CNRS, Luminy-Marseille), D. Caucal (IRISIA-CNRS, Rennes), C. Frougny (LIAFA, Université Paris 8), T. Helleseth (University of Bergen), S. Langerman (FNRS, Université Libre de Bruxelles), F. Neven (Limburgs Universitair Centrum, Diepenbeek), M.-F. Sagot (Inria Rhône-Alpes, Université Lyon I).<p> We would like to thanks all the participants, the invited speakers and the anonymous referees who made possible this event and special issue. Each paper has been refereed using high scientific standard by two independent referees. Readers of this special issue may wonder why it took so long to obtain it. We have encountered some problems with the formerly chosen journal and for the benefit of the contributors to this issue, we have chosen Discrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science to publish their work.