Taal en Tongval - Volume 68, Issue 1, 2016

Language variety and educational achievement of indigenous primary school pupils

This article explores the relations between language and mathematics test performance and a range of language related characteristics. The sample consists of 3,639 grade 2 pupils from 437 Dutch primary schools. Data were collected in 2014. The main question is whether pupils who speak Standard Dutch at home perform better than pupils who speak Frisian, a Dutch regional language or dialect. Results of the present analyses were compared with those from analyses performed on similar data collected in 1994. Between 1994 and 2014 the share of children who mostly speak standard Dutch with their mother and father has increased with 8 percent points to 95 percent. The share of mothers and fathers who mostly speak standard Dutch to each other has increased with 17 percent points to 91 percent. No correlation was found between language choice, i.e. speaking Standard Dutch or speaking Frisian, a regional language or dialect, and language and mathematic test performance. One remarkable finding was that children from the province of Limburg perform well while they speak Standard Dutch least.

Between Oudorp and Oldorp: to what extent do place names obey isoglosses?

A widely known isogloss in the Dutch-German linguistic region separates a western area with the phoneme [ʌu] (rendered as <ou> or <au>), followed by a dental consonant (like in oud ‘old’ and hout ‘wood’ on the one hand, and an eastern area with [ɔl], followed by a dental consonant, on the other. The vocalization of /l/ started in the southwestern part of the Dutch language area and expanded to the east and north.

The position of the isogloss has been established in the 20^th century on the basis of appellatives in the spoken language. The question is, to what extent toponyms, too, coincide with the isogloss. In many locations two toponym variants exist, namely a supraregional – and official – one like Oudeschans and a regional one like Òlschans. Based on data concerning the above mentioned isogloss, the article explores whether the supraregional or the dialectal toponyms, respectively, respond to the expectations the isogloss evokes.

National variation in foreign language teaching: a tool for intra-linguistic curriculum analysis

This article proposes an evaluation instrument (‘pluricentricity checklist’) for coursebook analysis focusing on (standard) language variation. The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages advocates the development of language learners’ and users’ sociolinguistic competencies, which include linguistic awareness of national and intranational language variation. Based on a review of pertinent linguistic and educational literature, the checklist presented in this article will meet the needs of both teachers and coursebook editors, and of foreign and second language students, all of whom are involved in teaching and learning pluricentric languages. An evaluation of Sprachkurs Niederländisch (Melis 2011) and Routledge Intensive Dutch Course (Quist, Sas & Strik 2006), two examples of course materials for learning Dutch as a foreign language, serves to demonstrate the instrument. It is not being propagated with a view to productive mastery of as many national variants as possible – least of all by beginner students – but should contribute to a growing recognition of (standard) language variation in modern foreign/second language teaching and learning.