2004
Volume 14, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 1384-5845
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1171

Abstract

The Dutch dialects display massive variation in their verbal paradigms. Traditionally, this variation has been explained as the result of developments in phonology, such as deletion of inflectional endings such as schwa, –t and –n, and pragmatics, such as the replacement of the 2sg. pronoun du with the honorific jij, which caused the s-ending to disappear. More recently, it has been proposed that morphology, more specifically paradigmatic structure, plays a role as well: the patterns of syncretism that are found in the verbal paradigms of the Dutch dialects, are believed to be manifestations of natural patterns of syncretism (e.g., Bennis & MacLean 2006). This article shows that these morphological accounts lack cross-linguistic support, and discusses data from Dutch that argue against paradigmatic structure as an explanatory factor. The focus lies on the 2pl.-data, where the shift of –t to –e(n) in Hollandic dialects has been argued to be the clearest example of a morphologically-driven change (Aalberse 2007). But this development too is better explained as the result of an interplay of pragmatic and prosodic factors, viz. the rise of the 2pl. pronoun jullie and the avoidance of a stresh clash occurring by the use of jullie in post-verbal position.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/NEDTAA2009.2.PADE359
2009-07-01
2022-08-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/NEDTAA2009.2.PADE359
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error