The Linguist is a languages magazine for professional linguists, translators, interpreters, language professionals, language teachers, trainers, students and academics with articles on translation, interpreting, business, government, technology
Issue link: https://thelinguist.uberflip.com/i/883785
thelinguist.uberflip.com OCTOBER/NOVEMBER The Linguist 23 FEATURES came into being, with certain linguistic forms deemed to be inherently better/more polite/ more beautiful than others. Traditionally, media and education play an important role in disseminating norms and propagating the standard language ideology. In Flanders, the development of Standard Dutch, under Brabantic (Antwerp) influence, came to a halt in the second half of the 16th century, when the Habsburg Netherlands were split in two: the territory of the Republic (roughly corresponding with present-day Netherlands) and the Spanish Netherlands (coinciding with present-day Belgium, Luxembourg and Nord-Pas-de-Calais). Standardisation continued in the Republic only, influenced by the prestigious Hollandic dialects. In the Spanish Netherlands, French became the dominant official language, even though the majority of its inhabitants spoke Dutch. It was only in the course of the 19th century that Dutch gained rights as an official language and the need was felt for a standard variety. After some debate on whether Flanders should develop its own Flemish standard or adopt the standard Netherlands variety, the exoglossic Netherlandic Dutch standard (Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands) was actively propagated as the language of culture and civilization. In the 20th century, primetime educational TV and radio programmes taught Flemings 'proper Dutch'; an official language advisor was appointed to guard language use on the public broadcasting channel; language advice columns were published in national newspapers; and groups of secondary-school kids united in so-called ABN-kernen (literally 'Standard Dutch hearts') to 'conquer' the playground for standard Dutch. As has been convincingly demonstrated by Jürgen Jaspers and Sarah Van Hoof, 2 these campaigns did not result in widespread standard language use in speech – in daily life, most Flemings speak tussentaal (literally 'in-between-language', a mix of the official standard and local dialect). They did, however, establish strict norms for writing, and imbued the population with the idea that Standard Dutch is superior to other varieties. Standard language on the brink? Rumour has it that standard language ideologies are now rapidly crumbling; that regionalisms will be increasingly tolerated where the standard used to be the norm, and teenagers will no longer be able to formulate grammatically 'correct' sentences. Such complaints are common through the ages, so were things really better in the old days? There is no denying that something is changing. It is telling that in 2011 the language advisor of the Flemish public broadcaster VRT announced a more open attitude towards accent variation. My own research in three Flemish cities revealed that women aged 20-35 use more non-standard elements in formal interviews than those aged 50-65. A study in Flemish schools by Steven Delarue showed that only a limited number of teachers aged over 50 make exclusive use of Standard Dutch while teaching, while younger teachers use more non-standard features. 3 When it comes to speech, non-standard forms indeed appear to be on the increase. The written standard seems to resist change more than the spoken standard. In Flanders, for example, research has shown the Flemish formal written language to be converging with the 'Dutch' Dutch formal written language, whereas in speech there is evidence of divergence. 4 There is little hard-and-fast evidence that spelling norms are on the wane. A 2010 report of the Nederlandse Taalunie (Dutch Language Union) reveals that spelling proficiency in Flemish lower education decreased slightly between 2000 and 2010, but the difference was small and probably related to the increase of non-native speakers in Flemish education. In discussing the evolution or downfall of language norms, it is important to distinguish between the ability to realise norms and the willingness to do so. Only a weakening of willingness can be interpreted as a sign of degrading norms. If a decrease in spelling proficiency is demonstrated empirically, the question is whether this is due to a lack of willingness to spell correctly or to pedagogical or cognitive changes causing lower proficiency levels. In this respect, it is significant that the young Flemish participants in my research used more non-standard variants than the older participants in the recorded interviews, but performed equally well in a standard language test designed to study the proficiency in the traditional norm. The younger participants are clearly as capable of using standard norms as the older ones, but they are not willing to do so in spontaneous speech, hinting at norm change. Vanishing vs. changing norms An increase in non-standard language features signifies change but it does not necessarily imply vanishing norms. Change is inherent to language, and standard language can also change. In recent research on language norms, a distinction is often made between destandardisation and demotisation. The term 'demotisation' refers to the process of standard language change, whereby speakers still have the intention to use standards and adhere to standard language ideology. Destandardisation, by contrast, implies norm degradation – a radical weakening of the standard language ideology. Destandardisation and demotisation have been observed in several European language communities in the last few years. Norway, for instance, has seen destandardisation, whereas Denmark, Germany and Flanders seem to be experiencing demotisation. Speakers of (informal) tussentaal are seen as more cool, dynamic, assertive than speakers of Standard Dutch DRAMATIC VOICES Tussentaal ('in-between-language') is often heard in Flemish soap operas such as Thuis (left)