2004
Volume 71 Number 2
  • ISSN: 0039-8691
  • E-ISSN: 2215-1214

Abstract

Abstract

The French cultural hegemony in Europe over the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries affected Dutch society. During the French period (1795-1813), the French influence on Dutch politics was significant as well. As a result, the Dutch language ‘frenchified’: many loan words and loan suffixes were borrowed from French. A corpus analysis of the family letters of the Bijleveld family from Leiden (1813-1814) reveals the extensive impact of French language contact. Especially in the letters of son Theodoor, who was sent to France in 1813 to serve for Napoleon’s (‘guard of honor’), the amount of loan suffixes is considerable. This result outnumbers the outcomes of the study by Rutten, Vosters and Van der Wal (2015) and shows that the language use of elite citizens was significantly influenced by French. A comparison between loan suffixes and loan words in the letter corpus reveals an even more compelling result: the relative frequency of loan words in the corpus is twice as high as the relative frequency of loan suffixes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/TET2019.2.STEV
2020-03-01
2021-12-03
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/00398691/71/2/03_TET2019_2_STEV.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5117/TET2019.2.STEV&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Coetsem, Frans van, 1988.Loan phonology and the two transfer types in language contact.Dordrecht:Foris Publications.
  2. Coetsem, Frans van, 2000.A general and unified theory of the transmission process in language contact.Heidelberg:C. Winter.
  3. Elspaß, Stephan, 2007.‘A twofold view “from below”: New perspectives on language histories and language historiographies’. In: ElspaßStephan, LangerNils, ScharlothJoachim &VandenbusscheWim (eds.), Germanic language histories ‘from below’ (1700-2000).Berlijn & New York:Walter de Gruyter,3-9.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Evans, Mel, 2015.‘“The vssual speech of the Court”? Investigating language change in the Tudor family network (1544-1556)’.Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics,1, 153-188.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Frijhoff, Willem, 1991.‘“Bastertspraek en dartele manieren”, de Franse taal in Nederlandse mond’.Jaarboek van de Maatschappij voor Nederlandse Letterkunde 1989-1990,13-25.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Frijhoff, Willem, 2015.‘Multilingualism and the challenge of frenchification in the early modern Dutch republic’. In: PeersmanCatharina, RuttenGijsbert &VostersRik (eds.), Past, present and future of a language border. Germanic-Romance encounters in the Low Countries.Berlin & New York:De Gruyter,115-140.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Koch, Peter &WulfOesterreicher, 2012.‘Language of immediacy – language of distance: Orality and literacy from the perspective of language theory and linguistic history’. In: LangeClaudia, WeberBeatrix &WolfGöran (eds.), Communicative spaces: Variation, contact, change. Papers in honour of Ursula Schaefer.Frankfurt:Peter Langer,441-473.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Lichtenauer, Wilhelm Franz, 1971.De Nederlanders in Napoleons Garde d’Honneur.Rotterdam & ’s Gravenhage:Nijgh & Van Ditmar.
  9. Martineau, France, 2013.‘Written documents. What they tell us about linguistic usage’. In: WalMarijke van der & RuttenGijsbert (eds.), Touching the past. Studies in the historical sociolinguistics of ego-documents.Amsterdam & Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,129-147.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Noordam, Dirk Jaap, 2003.‘Demografische ontwikkelingen’. In: MaanenRudi van (ed.), Leiden. De geschiedenis van een Hollandse stad. Deel 2 1574-1795.Leiden:Stichting Geschiedschrijving Leiden,42-53.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Ridder, Paul de, 1999.The use of languages in Brussels before 1794. In: BlockmansWim, BooneMarc &HemptinneThérèse de (eds.), Secretum scriptorum. Liber alumnorum Water Prevenier.Leuven:Garant,145-164.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Ruberg, Willemijn, 2005.Conventionele correspondentie. Briefcultuur van de Nederlandse elite.Nijmegen:Uitgeverij Vantilt.
  13. Rutten, Gijsbert &Marijkevan der Wal, 2014.Letters as loot: A sociolinguistic approach to seventeenth- and eighteenth century Dutch.Amsterdam & Philadelphia:John Benjamin Publishing Company.
  14. Rutten, Gijsbert, RikVosters &Marijkevan der Wal, 2015.‘Frenchification in discourse and practice: loan morphology in Dutch private letters of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries’. In: PeersmanCatharina, RuttenGijsbert &VostersRik (eds.), Past, present and future of a language border. Germanic-Romance encounters in the Low Countries.Berlin & New York:De Gruyter,143-169.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Sairio, Anni, 2013.‘Cordials and sharp satyrs. Stance and self-fashioning in eighteenth-century letters’. In: WalMarijke van der & RuttenGijsbert (eds.), Touching the past. Studies in the historical sociolinguistics of ego-documents.Amsterdam & Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company,183-200.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Sijs, Nicoline van der, 2005.Groot leenwoordenboek.Utrecht & Antwerpen:Van Dale Lexicografie.
  17. Sijs, Nicoline van der (ed.), 2010.Etymologiebank. Online raadpleegbaar via etymologiebank.nl/.
  18. Strien-Chardonneau, Madeleine van, 2014.‘The use of French among the Dutch elites in eighteenth-century Holland’. In: RjéoutskiVladislav, ArgentGesine &OffordDerek (eds.), European francophonie. The social, political and cultural history of an international prestige language.Oxford:Peter Lang,145-173.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Thomason, Sarah Grey &TerrenceKaufman, 1988.Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics.Berkeley, Los Angeles & London:University of California Press.
  20. Thomason, Sarah Grey, 2001.Language contact. An introduction.Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.
  21. Vandenbussche, Wim (ed.), 2004.Terug naar de bron(nen). Taal en taalgebruik in de 19de eeuw in Vlaanderen. Handelingen van het Academiecolloquium van 28 mei 2003.Gent:Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde.
  22. Vanhecke, Eline &Jetjede Groof, 2007.‘New data on language policy and language choice in 19th-century Flemish city administrations’. In: ElspaßStephan, LangerNils, ScharlothJoachim &VandenbusscheWim (eds.), Germanic language histories ‘from below’ (1700-2000).Berlijn & New York:Walter de Gruyter,449-469.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Wal, Marijke van der &Cor vanBree, 2008.Geschiedenis van het Nederlands.Houten:Spectrum.
  24. Watts, Richard, 2012.‘Language myths’. In: Hernández-CampoyJuan Manuel & Conde-SilvestreJuan Camilo (eds.), The handbook of historical sociolinguistics.Oxford:Wiley-Blackwell,585-606.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Woordenboek der Nederlandsche taal (WNT)
    Woordenboek der Nederlandsche taal (WNT). In: TaalbankDe Geïntegreerde. Uitgegeven door Instituut voor Nederlandse Lexicologie (INL). Laatste wijzigingen op 2 juli 2010. Online raadpleegbaar via gtb.inl.nl/.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/TET2019.2.STEV
Loading
/content/journals/10.5117/TET2019.2.STEV
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Dutch; ego-documents; frenchification; language contact; loan suffixes; loan words
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