Language and Intergroup Relations in Flanders and the Netherlands [Reprint 2011 ed.] 9783110881394, 9783110130850

Table of contents :
Introduction
IN FLANDERS
The relationship between Flanders and Brussels from 1830 to 1980. Mechanisms of power in a historical context
Minority problems: on the progress of Netherlandic primary education in Brussels
Migrants’ children in Flemish schools in Brussels: a matter of options
“Community” problems in Belgium: some recent developments in the Flemish-Francophone conflict
The evolution of the diglossic system in Flanders (1850–1914)
IN THE NETHERLANDS
Gradual dialect loss and semantic fields
Dialect loss in Maastricht: attitudes, functions and structures
Determining the explanatory factors of t/d deletion in the dialect of Nijmegen
Directness, explicitness and orientation in Turkish family interaction
Socio-cultural predictors of minority children’s first and second language proficiency
Changes in the pronunciation of Frisian under the influence of Netherlandic
Subject Index
List of authors

Citation preview

Language and Intergroup Relations in Flanders and in The Netherlands

Topics in Sociolinguistics This series in sociolinguistics aiming at the publication of works which take as their unifying theme the interplay between linguistic, social and cultural factors in human communication. Items to be published will range widely from, for example, coverage of ways of speaking among diverse groups in a large geographical area, to a detailed study of a single feature of conversational narratives in American English. Contributions will include monographs, collections of papers, and previously unpublished dissertations.

Editors: Nessa Wolfson University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, U.S.A.

Marinel Gerritsen Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam, Holland

Other books in this series 1. Nessa Wolfson: CHP The Conversational Historical Present in American English Narrative 2. Anne Pauwels: Immigrant Dialects and Language Maintenance in Australia 3. Jonathan Holmquist: Language Loyalty and Linguistic Variation 4. Nancy H. Hornberger: Bilingual Education and Language Maintenance 5. Roeland van Hout and Uus Knops (eds.): Language Attitudes in the Dutch Language Area

Language and Intergroup Relations in Flanders and in The Netherlands Kas Deprez (ed.)

Ψ 1989

FORIS PUBLICATIONS Dordrecht - Holland/Providence Rl - U.S.A.

Published

by:

Foris Publications Holland P.O. Box 509 3300 A M Dordrecht, The Netherlands Distributor

for the U.S.A. and

Canada:

Foris Publications USA, Inc. P.O. Box 5904 Providence Rl 02903 U.S.A.

ISBN 90 6765 390 X (Bound) ISBN 90 6765 391 8 (Paper) © 1989 Foris Publications - Dordrecht No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the copyright owner. Printed in The Netherlands by ICG Printing, Dordrecht.

Contents

Introduction Kas Deprez

IN FLANDERS The relationship between Flanders and Brussels from 1830 to 1980. Mechanisms of power in a historical context Harry van Veithoven

11

Minority problems: on the progress of Netherlandic primary education in Brussels Kas Deprez and Armel Wynants

29

Migrants' children in Flemish schools in Brussels: a matter of options Ludo Smeekens

45

"Community" problems in Belgium: some recent developments in the Flemish-Francophone conflict Serge Govaert

57

The evolution of the diglossic system in Flanders (1850-1914) Koen Jaspaert and William van Belle

67

IN THE NETHERLANDS Gradual dialect loss and semantic fields Cor Hoppenbrouwers

83

Dialect loss in Maastricht: attitudes, functions and structures Henk Münstermann

99

Determining the explanatory factors of t / d deletion in the dialect of Nijmegen Roeland van Hout

129

Directness, explicitness and orientation in Turkish family interaction Erica Huls

145

Socio-cultural predictors of minority children's first and second language proficiency Ludo Verhoeven

165

Changes in the pronunciation of Frisian under the influence of Netherlandic Anthonia Feitsma

181

Subject Index 195 List of authors 197

Introduction Kas Deprez

0. This book contains the papers that were read at the Zesde Sociolinguistendagen held at the University of Antwerp (UIA) on 16 and 17 October 1986. The theme of the conference was "Language and Intergroup Relations in the Netherlandic Speaking Area"; the area in question being restricted to its two most salient components viz. The Netherlands and Flanders. That is, French Flanders and the overseas territories - Surinam and the Antilles - were left out of consideration. Although the programme was supposed to capture all the important areas of linguistic tension currently existing in both countries on the level of social interaction, it should be observed that an overall state of the art report was not envisaged. Instead of aiming at a synthesis, preference was given to contributions that informed about new research (the only exception being Van Velthoven's general survey article). Hence, no objection was raised to contributions presenting only tentative results about ongoing research. In other words, the present volume is to be regarded as a "book of samples" for the articles contained in it are fairly diverse in nature.

1. In Flanders the study of language and intergroup relations is not the concern of sociologists, social psychologists and sociolinguists only. This is not surprising given the political role language plays in trilingual Belgium. In the Belgian half of the present book the reader will therefore find articles by a historian (H.Van Velthoven) and a political scientist (S.Govaert) though one could easily have invited politicians, lawyers and economists too in which case, however, too little room would have been available for contributions from The Netherlands. In this respect, it should perhaps been pointed out that compared with the immense complexity of the language situation in Belgium, the sociolinguistic problems in The Netherlands would seem to be somewhat futile. Language as a factor in nation and state building is very much a Belgian rather that a Dutch reality. For those who want a more concrete illustration

2 Κ. Deprez of this statement it suffices to point to the different role language plays on the highest political level for it would be difficult to imagine that in The Netherlands a government might fall over a linguistic dispute. This statement does not imply that The Netherlands constitute a monolingual region but rather that speakers of any language other than Netherlandic do not emerge as a force to be reckoned with (think of Frisians, migrant workers and people from the former colonies). Even in The Netherlands little or no attention is given to language groups which are unable to make their presence felt and hence do not enjoy any real power, despite the rational/pedantic character of Dutch culture (in contradistinction to Belgium ethnic minorities in The Netherlands do have voting-power on the municipal level). Given this fundamental difference it was impossible for both halves of the present volume to exhibit a high degree of parallelism. As opposed to the various contributions in the Belgian section of the book which explicitly deal with relations of power, the Dutch share offers only the introduction of the article on Friesland as a counterpart. In fact, this very article does not concern itself with institutional problems. In it, A.Feitsma presents the most significant results of a research project which aimed at investigating a number of Frisian sandhi phenomena in different sections of the population. Specific attention was paid to the impact of the dominant Netherlandic variant on these processes. Sociolinguistics in the narrow sense of the term, that is. The Belgian contributors, however, do concern themselves to a large extent with institutional problems. H.Van Velthoven, in a general survey article, traces the particular relationship that has existed between Flanders and Brussels from the beginnings of the Belgian state onwards. Already at the early stages this relationship turned out to be very problematic because after a couple of decades Brussels began to show a distinct Francophone character despite the fact that historically it is a Flemish town and that even in 1830 two thirds of its population spoke a Flemish Brabantic dialect. The origin of this particular development was to be found in the function of Brussels as the capital of a monolingual Francophone state. In fact, the Frenchification of Brussels would go on until the 1960s when Flanders had already clearly resumed its overwhelving Flemish character and the Flemings considered themselves strong enough to launch a recuperating offensive also with respect to Brussels. Ever since progress has been made although not in all domains (the reader is referred to the at times excellent but at the same time often disappointing synthesis offered by Witte and Baetens Beardsmore (1987)). Probably the most impressive testimony of this particular Flemish progress in Brussels is the increasing number of pupils in the Flemish kindergartens and primary schools of the Brussels agglomeration. This

Introduction

3

new development and its significance are the subject matter of K.Deprez and A. Wynants' contribution to this volume. The history of Flemish primary education in Brussels was long characterized by huge difficulties and, annoyingly perhaps, by a steady decline. At various moments, beginning in 1932, Flemish politicians tried to slow down this process by turning into a law the principle according to which the native language of the child ought to be his language at school. The head of the family was under the obligation to sign a declaration as to the child's mother tongue. However, the passing of this bill did not have the effect that had been envisaged; not even after 1963 when its supervision had become much stricter. Also, French-speaking Belgians used every possible occasion to denounce the backwardness of the principle in question. In 1970-71 the Flemish had to concede. The freedom of the head of the family to choose the language of education was restored and both the Flemish and Francophone groups involved predicted the complete downfall of Flemish primary education in Brussels. This prediction has turned out to be quite incorrect for new social realities started to exert a greater influence and in the end even turned back the old pattern. One should bear in mind here not only the growing importance of bilingualism in Brussels, but also the abundance of children of migrant workers in Francophone schools as a result of which an increasing number of bilingual as well as monolingual French-speaking families tend to opt in favour of Flemish schools (which again leads to specific problems). L.Smeekens' article deals with the - admittedly far more limited - presence of migrant workers' children in Flemish schools. The author does not present any empirical results but tries to answer a number of fundamental questions about the bicultural education that has been organized by a Flemish organization called "Foyer" since 1980 and to whose staff Smeekens belongs. It is an article about basic principles and the options they have led to. To organize Netherlandic based bicultural education for migrant workers' children in a town such as Brussels is of course not something that can easily be taken for granted. Netherlandic is after all the language of the minority although at the same time it is a language that is constantly gaining more and more prestige. As for the foreign language itself, it should be observed that there remain crucial problems of both a legal and a pedagogical nature (for instance, to what extent can the notion 'mother tongue' be used here?). S. Govaert surveys the political developments that took place in Belgium during the first half of the 1980s and rightly wonders whether in this period linguistic problems were really relegated to a secondary role. Brussels does not play a crucial role in this article. Indeed, after Brussels had been assigned an important place in the 1970 revision of the constitution (which saw the end of a unitary Belgium) no consensus could be reached about the

4 Κ. Deprez new powers of Brussels in the 1980 revision of the constitution; Brussels and its surrounding region were eventually put in cold storage. Then, in the 1980s Belgian politicians seemed to believe that all existing linguistic disputes could be frozen; the economic recovery of the country had to enjoy top priority as linguistic problem areas had already used up too much time and money. Still, in 1985 the government again collapsed as a result of a linguistic dispute and in 1987 - one year after Govaert had finished his contribution - its successor government also fell over a linguistic dispute while the period between October 1986 and October 1987 had been completely taken up by the situation in Voeren/Fourons. The final Belgian contribution to this volume is by K.Jaspaert and W. Van Belle. They concentrate on an aspect of the linguistic situation in Flanders that is about as significant as the reigning French-Flemish opposition viz. the way in which Flemings look upon Netherlandic as spoken in The Netherlands. Officially Flanders and The Netherlands speak the same language but the likelihood that a Fleming, using his standard language, might be mistaken for a Dutchman is extremely small. Flemish ideologists of the Pan-Netherlandic idea used to say that this was due to the lack of contact between the two communities. In the meantime, however, a number of sociolinguistic investigations have shown that the majority of Flemings do not want to talk like the Dutch and, furthermore, consider the Dutch to be a fairly uncivilized people. Contact will not solve this problem. Quite on the contrary! (the reader may be referred to Deprez (1987: 83-109) for a survey of the results emanating from the sociolinguistic research on the Netherlandic spoken in Belgium). Jaspaert and Van Belle's aim is to look for the deeper causes of this particular Flemish attitude. More specifically, they wonder why the results of the above mentioned investigations cannot easily be reconciled with the traditional view of the spread of Netherlandic in Flanders as put forward by philologists - a view according to which philologists assumed the role of pioneers whose options were accepted by the people. Jaspaert and Van Belle provide the stepping stones for a true historiography. They take into account the role of non-philologists in the process of Flemish emancipation who opted for Netherlandic because they wanted to oppose French through a fully acceptable 'cultural' language but who nevertheless remained ensconced in a Flemish frame of mind.

2.

Let us now turn to the Dutch section of the present volume. Here, special attention has been devoted to areas of tension such as the dialect-standard language interface and the problems related to the linguistic situation of

Introduction

5

ethnic minorities. The latter issue was also touched upon in the Belgian section of the book but, as stated above, only through a programmatic article elucidating the options taken by the 'Foyer' in Brussels. The Dutch contributions, however, are clearly of a different nature in that foremost attention is paid to empirical results. Even more striking perhaps is the fact that the Dutch section of the book contains three articles that deal with various aspects of dialect loss and dialect maintenance whereas such topics are completely lacking from the Flemish contributions. One might have expected the opposite given the far more important role played by dialects in Flanders than in (most parts of) The Netherlands. The organizer of the Zesde Sociolingu'istendagen is not to be blamed for this. It is not the case that he should be reproached for having given top priority to Flemish- Francophone problem areas in Belgium; rather, the lack of balance is due to the fact that socio-dialectology has been developed to a far greater extent in The Netherlands than in Flanders. Some might want to trace this state of affairs back to the existence of individuals as well as research centres in Flanders that are primarily interested in a "system-structure" description of the rich Flemish dialect landscape and less so in its sociolinguistic aspects. However, in claiming this one would seem to miss the point for individuals and centres in both countries are to be situated within fairly divergent traditions of social science research. In The Netherlands far greater importance is attached to this kind of research than in Belgium. The Flemish sociologist L.Huyse and his Dutch colleague J.Berting (cf. Huyse and Berting 1983) observed that in The Netherlands there exist a basic attitude reflecting the belief that important social problems can be solved by experts in a business-like, instrumental way which gives a more scientific character to the areas of social tension as well as to the policy pursued to tackle them. The Dutch public authorities will be more likely to appeal to experts or require the assistance of advisory committees in order to obtain scientific support for their decisions. This approach may not guarantee better solutions but at least it creates a peculiar climate in which researchers themselves stand to enjoy specific advantages. In The Netherlands a greater amount of social science research is carried out which involves more people and which enjoys considerable financial support. Belgium, on the other hand, is in the first place a liberal country where science and power happen to be two clearly distinct factors and where the term 'policy' is often synonymous for unrestricted compromises among the many existing powerful factions. Over the past twenty years, socio-dialectological research in The Netherlands has achieved quite significant results. The most important research centre is undoubtedly Nijmegen where, in the early 1970s, a large scale interdisciplinary investigation was started on the educational problems facing native dialect speakers (cf. Stijnen and Valien 1981). Some years

6

Κ. Deprez

ago the main focus of socio-dialectology was channelled towards research on dialect loss and dialect maintenance. The first systematic account of the investigations carried out in this domain appeared in a special issue of the journal Taal en Tongval (cf. Hägen 1986). It should be observed that also outside Nijmegen similar research is taking place, notably in Amsterdam and in Groningen. The Dutch section of this volume begins with an article by C.Hoppenbrouwers who works in Groningen but happens to be a native of the southern Dutch region (where the data presented in his contribution was gathered). The author investigates the knowledge and reported use of about a hundred dialect words in various categories of native speakers of the dialect. It turns out that both knowledge and use are declining in accord with not only the age but also the sex of the subjects as women score significantly lower than men. Of crucial importance to Hoppenbrouwers' research is the notion of semantic field the utility of which is clearly demonstrated for the domain of sociolinguistics. The author is able to show that the use of the dialect words declines especially if these belong to fields that are traditionally regarded as the prerogative of women. The Nijmegen school is represented in this volume by H.Münstermann. His article contains important results of a large scale investigation in Maastricht, a town situated in the extreme Southeastern part of the country with a population of about 110,000. From a socio-dialectological point of view, Maastricht differs clearly from other Dutch towns in that its dialect is still very popular and is not confined to the lower classes of the population. Quite on the contrary, one would say, as the distribution of dialect and standard language seems to be functional rather than social. Even so, it has been pointed out on several occasions that also the dialect of Maastricht is declining. Münstermann questioned some sixty native inhabitants of Maastricht spread over three generations and belonging to two socially distinct parts of town. They were submitted to an impressive series of tests such as attitude tests, production and acceptability tests on a number of morphological features typical of the Maastricht dialect and questions about the use and suitability of the dialect in various domains and situations. Tests used to check affectivity show that the dialect still enjoys considerable approval but more objective tests, used to capture knowledge and use of the dialect, show that it too is declining especially with the younger generation and in the posher area of the town. R.Van Houfs contribution assumes a unique position in this volume. Once again he concentrates on the phenomenon of t/d deletion, a showpiece dating back to the heyday of the Labovian paradigm. The material on which he tries out his analysis comes from the town of Nijmegen where, from a social point of view, the local dialect is heavily stigmatized. Indeed, only 27% of his informants admit to still speaking the dialect. Also, Van

Introduction

1

Hout's material is built up in line with the Labovian principle according to which phonetic-phonological variation should be investigated in terms of attention paid to speech. The analysis presented here is restricted to variation in the pronunciation of words read out from a list. However, one's knowledge has in the meantime grown to such an extent that in this article an analysis can be presented which is probably more sophisticated than anything we have seen so far in this domain. Van Hout approaches his data using the notions of sonority and syllabification which belong to the field of non-linear phonology and this would seem to have been a fruitful enterprise. At this point, there remain two contributions on the linguistic situation of ethnic minorities. On this topic too, a lot has been achieved in The Netherlands over the past few years. To get some idea of the nature and the quality of this kind of research the reader is referred to Extra, Van Hout and Valien (1987). The contributions that appear in the present volume are somewhat divergent. E.Huls investigates the use of directives in a Turkish family that has lived in The Netherlands for the past 14 years. The father is a factory worker who has been laid off, the mother is the housewife and the family has 4 children. Huls' work can be placed within a Bernsteinian framework which stresses the role of language in keeping up social inequality through the family context. The crucial point here is that Huls decidedly opts for an interactional approach. Her material was collected through participant observation: after a period of mutual habituation during which Huls worked as a domestic help, recordings were made of the natural linguistic interaction in the family. In her analysis of the use of directives in the family three concepts stand out viz. directness, explicitness and orientation. The results are then compared with the directive repertoire of 2 Dutch families where Huls had already carried out similar investigations on earlier occasions; the fathers in those two families were a janitor and a factory director respectively. Significant differences are found: in the Turkish family fewer directives are used and the repertoire is poorer; furthermore, hardly any reference is made to the school and the written word. Huls's conclusion is that the directive climate in this Turkish family does not seem to be very favourable as a preparation for a school career. Finally, L. Verhoeven reports on an investigation of the putative importance of socio-cultural factors in first and second language acquisition of migrant workers' children. The investigation concerned 74 Turkish children from the first forms of 10 primary schools in the eastern part of The Netherlands. Their knowledge of LI and L2 was correlated with a number of socio-cultural factors involving both attitude and behaviour not only of children but also of parents. A careful piece of work, which showed that especially the children's second language proficiency was substantially related to socio-cultural factors and the most relevant predictor

8 Κ. Deprez turned out to be the factor of language contact. Verhoeven's article constitutes a nice illustration of Dutch (and Anglo-Saxon) social research.

3.

To conclude, some explanation about the terminology used in this volume may be in order. The official name of the language of both The Netherlands and Flanders is Nederlands, a name that is best rendered in English by Netherlandic (even though in the Anglo-Saxon world the term Dutch is mostly used here). The term Dutch is probably too restricted or one-sided given its sole reference to situations in The Netherlands. Choosing Netherlandic as a cover term offers at least the advantage of allowing for the use of Dutch to refer to the language of The Netherlands - a term which is on a par with the word Flemish in Belgium.

4.

Finally, I should wish to gratefully acknowledge the generous support of the Belgian National Science Foundation (NFWO) and the Belgian Ministry of Education.

REFERENCES Deprez, K. (1987) Le neerlandais en Belgique, in J.Maurais (ed.), Politique et amenagement linguistiques, Gouvernement du Quebec,Conseil de la langue francaise, Le Robert, Paris, 47- 120. Extra, G., Van Hout, R., & T.Valien (eds.) (1987) Etnische minderheden. Taalverwerving, taalonderwijs, taalbeleid, Foris Publications, Dordrecht/Providence. Hägen, A.M. (1986) Dialectverlies en dialectbehoud, Taal en Tongval 38, 3-4. Huyse, L. & J.Berting (eds.) (1983) Als in een spiegel? Kritak, Louvain. Stijnen, S. & T.Valien (1981) Dialect als onderwijsprobleem, Staatsuitgeverij, The Hague. Witte, Ε. & H.Baetens Beardsmore (eds.) (1987) The interdisciplinary study of urban bilingualism in Brussels, Multilingual Matters (28), Clevedon/Philadelphia.

In Flanders

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels from 1830 to 1980. Mechanisms of power in a historical context Harry van Velthoven

1. LINGUISTIC OPPRESSION

When Belgium became independent in 1830, a state-national concept led to one official language. French was the sole language used in government, justice, secondary and further education, defence, etc., whereas the censuses pointed towards ethnical heterogeneity (e.g. the 1866 census recorded 50% Flemish unilinguals, 42.2% French unilinguals, 0.7% German unilinguals and 6.9% multilinguals). The infliction of French on Flanders had been enabled by various factors. Owing to the system of elections in which only a restricted number of taxpayers could vote, political power was in the hands of the wealthy class which was, even in Flanders, for the greater part frenchified. In Flanders a certain number of Flemish dialects were spoken, but it lacked a competing standard language, i.e. Netherlands. Moreover, due to its socio-economic underdevelopment and its withering structure of agriculture and crafts Flanders was well on its way to become one of the poorest regions in Western Europe. This contributed to the identification of Flanders and anything Flemish with poverty and backwardness, in contrast with industrial and expansive Wallonia. Being the vehicular language of the elite, French had many functions: it was the international cultural language which would put 'backward Flanders' on its way to civilization; it was the language of the Belgian Revolution and a patriotic link; it was the instrument in the hands of the elite who used it as a selection criterion for social mobility and as an additional means for social control. In short, it stimulated a kind of internal colonialism with social, economic and cultural aspects: the language structure being a structure of power and the language barrier being a social barrier. In the frenchification processes of the Flemish-speaking population two aspects should therefore be distinguished: on the one hand there are the socio-psychological mechanisms with processes of language change based on the principle of humiliation and respectability, and on the other hand there is the institutional support of these processes of assimilation. This also explains why its effects in the Flemish countryside differed from those in the cities. In the countryside, with its strict social hierarchy, rigid

12 Η. van Veithoven structures and limited social mobility, the consequences were marginal. Moreover, Flemish was used by the lower clergy as a traditional instrument against modernization. In the larger Flemish cities, however, the processes of assimilation came about much faster. While they were significant but limited in Antwerp and Ghent (in 1910 about 8% belonged to the exclusively or mainly French-speaking group), in Brussels a much more drastic process of language change had taken place. In 1864 already more than one third of the inhabitants of Brussels considered themselves to be mainly or exclusively French-speaking, and in 1910 this group had grown to about 50%. Some explanatory factors can be mentioned here: the stronger impact of the French era (1794-1814), the presence of an important group of French political exiles, the position of the capital where the central government and administration were located, the concentration of financial and large commercial establishments, the greater Walloon immigration and strategic office-filling, the slight competitiveness of the Brussels dialect, a negligible Flemish-minded middle-class, the lack of a wide industrial proletariat and the specific characteristics of the working class elite. Thus, the process of humiliation of the Flemish identity and the pressure for social integration were the largest in the capital, both quantitatively as well was qualitatively. This is even more important, when we consider the mass migration movements towards Brussels and the accelerated urbanization and suburbanization. In 1846 only 211,634 inhabitants lived in the present agglomeration of the 19 communes (of which 123,874 lived in the city of Brussels). One century later they numbered almost a million.

2. A DIFFERENT STATUS FOR BRUSSELS (LINGUISTIC LEGISLATION FROM 1873 TO 1914)

The reaction to this situation of language oppression started within the Flemish middle-class - out of indignation. It soon became a means to obtain political emancipation. This Flamingantism is a rather complex phenomenon in itself, consisting of several levels of differentiating ideological contents. With this emancipation movement the discussion of the basic language rights for Netherlandic-speaking people concerning law, government, education, etc. had become inevitable to valorise the language of the people, or better, its related cultural language. This led to the first Language Acts, of which the following can be stated in general: a.

They were restricted to Flanders and they guaranteed only a limited form of official bilingualism, without truly affecting the Francophone language power, nor the essence of the mechanisms of frenchification

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

b.

13

in education, internal language of service, trade and industry, ... The language-status of Brussels (the Capital) was permanently questioned. The Flamingants were eager to obtain these minimum acts for Brussels as well. They did not succeed, however, as the Francophone alliance (Wallonia, the Brussels 'haut monde', the Francophone upper class in Flanders) was turning Brussels into the ransom for the Flemish demands concerning Flanders. In justification, the capital was said to be a 'ville mixte' (mixed city) with a strong Francophone presence, where French was gaining ground every day. Yet, it ought to have been a patriotic meeting place where the 'äme beige' could grow with as little linguistic compulsion as possible. This ransom had three aspects: - There was a separate language status for the capital. Its Flemishspeaking population got little or no institutional protection and systematic offences against these few acts were condoned. - When in Flanders the knowledge of Netherlandic was imposed on civil servants who were actually in contact with the public, certain Ministeries reserved similar posts in Brussels for non-Netherlandic speakers. - Together with the expanding urbanization, this separate status was applied on an increasing number of originally Flemish communes, thereby illustrating the relation urbanization - frenchification. Before the First World War the agglomeration already comprised 13 communes, about half of which had been annexed for reasons of compromise, without reflecting the local reality.

For want of a national arrangement, most initiatives were left to the communes. This would not have been bad if these Brussels communes would have wanted to form a medium for Flanders and Wallonia, by pursuing a form of bilingualism. Round 1880 a serious effort was made in that direction by the Mayor of the city of Brussels, Charles Buls. He aimed at bilingualism through primary education by means of a transmutation system, but with the implicit acknowledgement of the superiority of French. However, the Brussels decision makers refused to follow him and to accept Netherlandic as a nearly equivalent official language. In practice Flemish-speaking children had to switch from the Flemish dialect to French without the intermediary knowledge of their own standard language. The principle of the mother tongue as the language of education was replaced in 1911 by the so-called "free choice by the head of the family" (see Deprez and Wynants in this volume). Language humiliation and the idea that the children already knew 'Flemish', made the Flemishspeaking Brussels inhabitants decide massively in favour of French, so

14 Η. van Veithoven that the breakdown of the remaining Flemish infrastructure began to look real. As a result the Francophones only knew French whereas the Flemishspeaking children of the first generation knew neither French nor Netherlandic. Nevertheless, the notion of bilingualism was held on to for political reasons as anyone who knew a few words of French was catalogued a bilingual. This way of cataloguing did not serve to indicate the bilingual character of the capital, but to signal its increasing Francophone dominance which would make 'Flemish' redundant. Consequently, more and more communes of the surrounding Flemish-Brabant region could be incorporated, so that both levels of decision making, municipal as well as national, reinforced one another. The manipulation of'bilingualism' had thus started to belong to the very core of the mechanisms of frenchification. The idea of French as the language of national unity could only survive as long as the national Francophone tributary elite was able to arrange things amongst themselves; but this idea would become illusive the very moment the Socialist movement - mainly under pressure from the Walloon proletariat - claimed universal suffrage and the Flemish masses too obtained the right to vote. In 1893 the tributary elite managed to limit this claim to universal plural voting. Especially in Flanders, the Catholic and Liberal electoral associations could still slow down the democratic break-through. When a Flemish economic catch-up movement was launched, and modernization occasioned an increasingly language-specific tertiary sector, when new Flemish pressure groups came forward from the official sector and the Flemish patronage of 'K.M.O.s' (small and medium-sized enterprises) and an extra-parliamentary Flemish-minded network was formed, when Flamingantism was adapted both in ideology and organization ... it gradually became obvious that the Flemish movement was no longer satisfied with a subordinate settlement of bilingualism for Flanders, but demanded full linguistic equality in Belgium. About 1910 it was clear that historical options would have to be taken. Generalized bilingualism in Belgium was rejected by Wallonia. Its LiberalSocialist majority, which had had to endure homogeneously Catholic governments since 1884 because of the Catholic majority in Flanders, feared - as a result of Walloon ignorance/obstinacy to learn Netherlandic - an ever increasing Flemish-clerical dominance in Belgium. At the same time, the majority of the Walloon anti-movement did realize that the 'Belgique ä papa' was over and acknowledged the existence of two nationalities in Belgium. They nevertheless tried to safeguard the Francophone cultural hegemony for the entire nation, with the following strategy: the ius soli for Wallonia, bilingualism for Flanders as regulated by the 'free choice by the head of the family' and a fortiori, the reinforcement of the Francophone presence in Brussels.

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

15

Many Flamingants did not see much use in national bilingualism either. The idea of a corresponding principle of territoriality for Flanders gained ground. At the same time the Netherlandization of the State University of Ghent had become the primary objective as no complete secondary and university education in Netherlandic existed. It would finally make possible the formation of a Flemish elite and take away the most important intellectual recruiting base of the 'franskiljons' (the Francophones in Flanders). But the lack of results, in spite of an unequalled Flemish mobilization, brought about such frustrations that the most radical wing of Flamingantism started to gain interest in the idea of governmental separation. In 1912 this idea had been launched by the Walloon anticlerical progressive majority of Liberals and Socialists, and this after one more failure on the national level and after having been wronged by the Flemish demands. Such a turn of events could only put the problem of Brussels in an even clearer focus. This development had become clear especially during the First World War and the German occupation of the greater part of Belgium. A fraction of radical Flamingants grew sympathetic towards active collaboration. They were sitting in the Council of Flanders, under German custody and receiving little support from the population. This fraction proclaimed governmental separation in 1917 and complete independence of Flanders in early 1918. The Brussels agglomeration would be turned into the capital of Flanders, whereas the Walloon ministeries would be forced to move to Namur. The end of the war put an abrupt end to these plans.

3. THE INTERBELLUM: FLANDERS NETHERLANDIZES A N D BRUSSELS FRENCHIFIES

After the war Flamingantism had some problems to regain its initial elan and in the 1920s it had to be satisfied with a number of crippled Language Acts. Yet, radical political changes had a favourable effect in time. As a matter of fact universal singular suffrage (1919-1921) had shaken up the political landscape. For Flanders it meant the political emancipation of the Catholic Workers' Movement, the break-through of Flemish Socialism, and the creation of a Flemish-nationalist party which was in favour of federalism. The electoral rise of this party from 1929 on, put pressure on the Catholic Party and necessitated various strategies which eventually were to reinforce the Flemish-minded wings within each of the traditional parties. In the 1930s a number of Language Acts turned Flanders into a unilingual area, comprising four Flemish provinces and the Brabant districts of Louvain and Brussels (except for the Brussels agglomeration).

16 Η. van Veithoven From then on a generation could grow up in Netherlands and the 'franskiljons' were being isolated. The language confrontation was now focused towards the remaining areas of tension: the permanent definition of the linguistic frontier between Flanders and Wallonia, the equality of rights in the central administration and in the Brussels agglomeration. In order to make the civil services bilingual, only two options were available: individual bilingualism or unilingual division. The Walloon rejection of individual bilingualism forced upon the central administration a division of Netherlandic and French 'language rolls' which had to be divided fairly; but this intention was realized very slowly and only in some Ministeries. Within the Brussels communes, on the contrary, individual bilingualism was taken as the criterion, with gradations according to the necessities of the departments. However, the requirement was restricted to the lowest categories who had actual contact with the public; the language exam was often reduced to a formality. Consequently, in 1963 still some 90% of the higher categories of civil servants were French-speaking. This situation had been facilitated by the Brussels local authorities who had preferred French unilingualism for their internal services. In short, the pursuit of a linguistic equilibrium was seriously hampered by Bruxellois obstinacy supported by the lack of sanctions in the Language Acts. The same applied to education in Brussels where the situation remained dramatic from the Flemish point of view. In a remarkable analysis Senator A.Vermeylen in 1940 clearly stated that all pre-World War I factors of frenchification were still at work to denationalize on a large scale Flemish children, primarily relying on the illegal 'free choice by the head of the family' and the absence of a Flemish infrastructure, from kindergartens to teacher training colleges. Whereas Flanders continued to netherlandize, Brussels kept on frenchifying. Little had changed as to the mentality of inferiority and the negative Flemish identity, nor had there been much success in the attempts to have the Flemish presence respected institutionally. In the meantime the city of Brussels had annexed three Flemish communes in 1921, whereas the agglomeration was extended to 16 communes. For further expansion, the regulations stipulated for the communes on the linguistic frontier would have to be appealed to: when a language minority reached the 30% level a shift to external bilingualism was to take place; the same regulations held for the internal service when a language minority became a majority. Thus the decennial census became the equivalent of a referendum and the periphery of Brussels could continue to shift. This process of change was stimulated by the improper use of the transmutation classes provided by the Education Act of 1932 for Flanders. The transmutation classes were meant as a temporary measure for French-speaking

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

17

people only, but eventually created in the Brussels periphery a situation in which the Francophone children could not be assimilated whereas the Flemish-speaking children were illegally admitted to these classes. During World War II collaborating Flemish Nationalists wanted to reconquer Brussels as a territory for Flanders. They insisted on having the Language Acts enforced hard-handedly, especially in education and did so with considerable success. As a consequence, Netherlandic was even more disliked, not only by the Francophones, but also by many Flemish inhabitants of Brussels, for whom the theft of the traditional language freedom became an aspect of the occupant's coercion.

4. FROM WORLD WAR II TO HERTOGINNEDAL (1963). THE LINGUISTIC CONFRONTATION MOVES TOWARDS THE BRUSSELS AGGLOMERATION

After the Liberation this feeling was reflected in an embittered anti-Flemish reflex, out of which the Francophones tried to get the maximum benefit, particularly in Brussels. In this context the language census of 1947 took place and its results were alarming, both for the agglomeration and for Flemish-Brabant. a.

b.

In 1954, as a result of the 1947 census, three new communes were annexed to the agglomeration, which then comprised 19 communes and 956,000 inhabitants. According to the census results the demographic expansion was accompagnied by a stunning process of language shift, although these very results were questioned by the Flemings. Compared to the 1866 census Netherlandic unilingualism had decreased from 46.2% to 9%, whereas French unilingualism had risen from 19.3% to 37%. In the city of Brussels only 24.3% declared to belong to the Netherlandic language group (mainly or exclusively). Moreover, the French-speaking group had reached an absolute majority in almost all communes. On the Flemish side Brussels was now spoken of as the 'cemetery of Flanders'. A second shock involved the extent of the Francophone spread into Flemish-Brabant. Four immediate peripheries noted minorities of already 30% to 40% while 33 other communes counted between 5 and 30% (4 from 20% to 30%, 16 from 10% to 20%, 13 from 5% to 10%), with extensions as far as the linguistic frontier with Wallonia and with impulses coming from the Francophone part of the Catholic University of Louvain. Lacking a permanent definition of the Brussels agglomeration, Flemish-Brabant appeared to be completely open. Not considering the phenomenon of sub-urbanization in itself, this evolution was stimulated by a complex of factors, such as: mismanagement

18 Η. van Veithoven of town-planning in the capital; better means of transport; emigration to the residential suburbs in the green periphery; impact of site and building speculators who attracted through their location mainly rich, i.e. predominantly Francophone immigrants, and finally acceptance by the Flemish, mainly rural population of these Francophones as a positive group of reference that was welcomed with great language goodwill. A number of these communes were soon governed de facto bilingually and Francophones did not integrate. They counted on the institutionalization of the language facilities first, and later on, when they would constitute the majority, on an automatic annexation to the agglomeration and its specific language status. In short, the socalled 'Brussels oil-slick', was quickly developing. At that moment the process of Francophone power acquisition within the agglomeration and along the periphery seemed unstoppable. Brussels was on its way to become 'le tres grand Bruxelles', and 'la francisation etait irreversible'. Free expansion had to be guaranteed; in the periphery individual language rights had to come before Flemish territorial rights. Against this menace the Flemish extra-parliamentary movement started to reorganize itself. In 1959 the Flemish Action Committee for Brussels and the Linguistic Frontier united almost every cultural association and pressure group in Flanders. It was supported by a secondary elite of Flemish mayors and local authorities. Among them discontent was growing as a result of the fact that despite an ever increasing Flemish demographic majority Flemings remained in a sociological minority position in that they lagged behind in political and social-economic matters involving policy, governmental make-up and standard of living. Against the background of recently pacified philosophic and socio-economic fields of tension (the strike of 1960-1961 left aside), this extra-parliamentary movement managed, in the beginning of the 'golden sixties', to take up again the Flemish issue within the Catholic Party (which until 1965 obtained more than 50% of the votes in Flanders). This time the demands for Brussels occupied a central place in the Flemish overall programme. It was argued that one remained a second-class Belgian citizen as long as one was a second-class citizen in Brussels, the capital. The abolition of new language censuses meant a first success. At the same time two impressive marches on Brussels in 1961 and 1962 made it evident that Flanders would not let go of Brussels. After having taken care of its own emancipation it was now capable of focusing more energy on the capital area to protect its Flemish presence there and to get administrative participation. This quest for equality would involve the pushing back of the Francophone position of domination and of the very mechanisms of frenchification. Consequently, the demands expressed con-

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

19

cerning the division of power in Brussels and the definition of the Brussels agglomeration were experienced by the Francophones as Flemish extremism and imperialism. After the 1962 agreement on the definition of the linguistic frontier between Flanders and Wallonia, the confrontation of both viewpoints led in 1963 to the 'Hertoginnedal' compromise. First, the language homogeneity of Flanders and Wallonia was confirmed and as far as education was concerned, the remaining transmutation classes in Flanders disappeared. Next, more radical measures were taken in order to stimulate the official bilingualism of Brussels in laws related to government and education. As for government, this time fixed percentages had to assure the Flemish of an equivalent part in the central services and in the Brussels municipal institutions, especially for leading functions. That is, In the central and equivalent services (which had escaped any regulation until then) the 'fair balance' was replaced by a more efficient system of language groups (a Netherlandic, a Francophone and a bilingual one in some 20% of the top functions). In the Brussels communes specific measures had to guarantee a serious bilingual functioning, both internally and externally. In 10 years' time equality in the higher functions had to be realised (at that moment a ratio of ll%-89%) together with an equal distribution of at least 50% of the functions under the grade of head of department. The language exams for the required degree of bilingualism were to be controlled. As for education, a Netherlandic primary school system was to be set up with separate boards, and control on the declaration of the head of the family regarding the child's language, was provided. Once again, the execution of these measures would leave much to be desired. Finally, there was the problem of the permanent definition of the Brussels agglomeration. To that purpose the Brussels district was administratively divided into a unilingual Flemish district Halle-Vilvoorde belonging to Flanders and into a bilingual district Brussels-Capital restricted to the 19 communes. Six Flemish-Brabant suburbs, however, received a different administrative status, with facilities in government (external bilingualism) and primary education for Francophones. In order to supervise the actual enforcement, control bodies were set up: a Committee for Language Supervision was installed and the function of Vice-Governor of Brabant was created. It appeared rather soon that the Hertoginnedal compromise had not led to pacification. The measures were contested on both sides. The Francophones were refused the planned annexation of 6 new FlemishBrabant communes to the Brussels agglomeration and they were moreover

20

Η. van Veithoven

highly dissatisfied with the equal rights measures for the Brussels agglomeration. For the Flemings, in spite of the gains, the demand for a permanent definition of the Brussels language border had not been realised. Facilities in the 6 Flemish-Brabant suburbs were experienced as a psychological defeat because it kept the Francophones' hope for a further language expansion alive. Facilities would not lead to integration but would merely set the mark for a new offensive. This came sooner than expected. For the first time the Brussels Francophones were afraid to lose their privileges and started a counter-offensive. In 1964 they organized themselves via the foundation of the F.D.F. (Front Democratique des Francophones), the Brussels "French-language" party. It constituted the emanation of the Walloon movement in Brussels which went into an alliance with the Liberal middle class. It recruited in the tertiary sector which had grown to high concentrations in the capital (and where Francophones felt threatened in their social position by bilingualism) and among those who supported the Francophone linguistic ideology. A defensive reflex towards the agglomeration went with an offensive position towards Flemish-Brabant, the break-through of the so-called 'carcan'. Central themes were: free choice of language, referenda in the periphery and the emphasizing of the Brussels identity. The latter was a reaction to the Flemish marches on Brussels, with references to the German occupation, to an atmosphere of Flemish menace from outside, with slogans like 'Bruxellois, maitre chez toi' and calls against Flemish imperialism. In this way the language issue escaped from the powerful Brussels fractions of the traditional parties which saw greater parts of their supporters join the F.D.F. Its rise in the Brussels district was spectacular: from 10% of the votes in 1965 to 34.5% in 1971 and almost 40% in 1974. It became the most important political factor in Brussels and set the tone in many communes. This new phenomenon evidently affected the other parties in the capital. So far these had been bilingual with a French dominance; now they wanted to make the Flemish candidates on the election lists pay the bill to avert the F.D.F. danger. This process of expulsion led to a Flemish radicalization and the rise of separate Flemish lists in Brussels from 1968 onwards.

5. INCREASING TENSIONS AMONG THE COMMUNITIES

All this created a polarization on language issues that would soon thoroughly shake up the national parties. The first catalyst took effect in the context of the democratization of secondary and university education after World War II and thus stimulated the awakening consciousness of a potential Flemish elite. As a consequence of the student explosion, the

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

21

Catholic University of Louvain had to consider expansion very urgently. Louvain-French, which together with Louvain-Netherlandic was situated in Flemish (unilingual) territory, wanted to remain where it was and asked for more language facilities. It dreamt - in accord with its own expansion plans - of a bilingual triangle Louvain-Brussels-Wavre, 'le tres grand Bruxelles de l'avenir' (32.5% of the students of Louvain-French came from Brussels). This implied the frenchification of a substantial part of FlemishBrabant, so that the Brussels dossier and the Louvain issue became entangled. The resulting revolt of the Flemish public opinion led to an arrangement which was favourable for the Flemish point of view. LouvainFrench moved to Walloon-Brabant. Simultaneously the University of Brussels was split. An autonomous V.U.B. (Free University of Brussels) became an important centre of the Netherlandic language. The Louvain issue had brought about such an emotional and mental alienation in the Catholic Party that its Flemish and Francophone members terminated the old unitarian party activities and established two independent parties. Because of similar language tensions in 1972 and 1979 the Liberal and Socialist parties followed this example. Consequently the once important grip of the Brussels fractions on their respective parties was considerably weakened. Some very drastic socio-economic changes were at the bottom of the linguistic divisions. They may explain why conflicts between the two communities would light up so passionately in the 1960-1980 period. Not only did the demographic dominance of Flanders continue (57% of the Belgian population in 1980), from the 1960s on Flanders also became the stronger economic region. This evolution was the result of opposite developments. The internationalization of the market via the EEC caused an influx of mainly American multinational capital that was mostly invested in Flanders because of its geographical position, its lower wages and its larger employment reserve. This meant industrial development of backward Flemish areas and a Flemish 'bourgeoisie' of managers was added to the traditional stratum of Flemish-minded employers. But in Wallonia, there was only the outdated Walloon industry viz. coalmines and steel industry. The tension between the Flemish and the Walloon movements naturally increased: both felt wronged by the Belgian unitarian nation for different reasons. In Flanders the sociological emancipation would have to be carried on towards full cultural independence. In 1973 complete netherlandization was imposed in Flemish trade and industry, so that the last domain of frenchification disappeared. Later on, the Flemish elite would consider the other Belgian unitarian matters and the resistance these matters engendered as retarding and slowing down the process of expansion. Hence the wish for a more profound institutional reform favouring own financial-

22 Η. van Veithoven economic means, a just budgetary division between Flanders and Wallonia and clear agreements regarding national solidarity. On the Walloon side other motives were at work. The Walloons felt economically abandoned by the national holding-'bourgeoisie' and by the state. In 1960-1961 the government's policy on social matters provoked a vehement strike on the part of the Socialist Party who, at the time, was in the opposition. It was mainly supported by Walloon Socialism (in 1961 still representing 47% of the Walloon votes) which formulated and popularized anti-capitalist structural reform and federalism. From then on the Socialist Party participated most of the time in governmental coalitions with the Catholics. Nevertheless Walloon Socialism soon concluded that its national majority strategy (a direct consequence of universal singular suffrage) would not be realized, and that, in spite of its considerable political preponderance in Wallonia it would not be able to take on a concrete form on the national level. What's more, the Party saw its electoral adherents drop out and was forced to acknowledge the success of the Rassemblement Wallon, a new Walloon federalistic party, so it also began to tune in to this new tendency. The new purpose was socio-economic regionalization with financial means of its own, made available for the economic reorganization and reconstruction of Wallonia. 'L'etat belgoflamand' was held responsible for the Walloon decline, and further political minorization was feared as a result of new adaptations of the number of parliamentary seats to the demographic evolution. Especially among the Walloon Socialists there emerged a mentality that might be compared to the one existing right before World War I. Frustration and irritation among all Francophones about the quick rise of Netherlands as a competing standard language, for the first time also in Brussels, played an important part in the process as well. It is this mixture of cultural and economic dossiers that heightened the explosive tensions in unitarian Belgium. The break-through of the so-called 'language-parties' was symptomatic: Volksunie (a continuation of the Flemish Nationalist Party) in Flanders, Rassemblement Wallon in Wallonia and F.D.F. in Brussels. In 1972 they scored 22.4% of the votes, eroding the electorate of the three traditional parties. The latter still accounted for 95.4% of the votes in 1958 but eventually did fall apart.

6. THE OUTCOME FOR THE BRUSSELS AGGLOMERATION AND THE PERIPHERY

Next, a search for new Belgian balances by means of constitutional reforms and a reorganization of the state was proclaimed. Explicit points of argument were the composition, the authority and the financial means of the potential regions: donations of the state to the region (the Walloon

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

23

point of view) or individual financing by the region itself (the Flemish point of view), and the criteria which were to be applied. The ultimate point of discussion was the description and status of the Brussels region. The discussion that was going on about regionalization gave the Brussels issue an extra dimension. Was it to be a regionalization of two with a separate status for Brussels as the capital area (the Flemish point of view) or a regionalization of three with Brussels as a third region in its own right (the Walloon-Francophone Brussels point of view)? Moreover, what about the definition of the hinterland, i.e. what about the periphery of Brussels? Last but not least, a two-third majority in parliament was necessary to turn the agreements into effective reforms. The constitutional reforms of 1970 and 1980 led Belgium from unitarism to regionalization. It might be useful to study the reciprocal strategies and the forms they took on in laborious compromises. Here we have to restrict ourselves to merely mention a number of relevant aspects. The position of Brussels blocked the discussion entirely during the 1970s. Only once did the dialogue between the communities (with the participation of the 'language-parties') seem to lead to an overall agreement; that was in "the Egmont-Stuyvenbergpact" of 1977-78. The indulgence of the Flemish political elite with regard to facilities in seven new Flemish-Brabant communes in the periphery was rejected by the extra-parliamentary Flemish Movement and so was the linking of the Francophones' interests in the periphery to those of the Flemish in the Brussels agglomeration. Thus the constitutional reforms ended in a new impasse. In 1980 the decision to freeze the Brussels issue was finally taken. Consequently the regionalization of three which was anticipated in 1970, was only elaborated for Flanders and Wallonia. For the Brussels agglomeration and periphery this resulted in the following balance: The Brussels agglomeration a.

b.

The constitutional reform of 1970 limited Brussels to 19 communes and alterations to its border would only be possible on the basis of a special majority. Brussels was officially regarded as a bilingual region. In 1980 it was decided that for regional questions the area remained governed by the National Parliament and a Brussels Executive which is part of the central government. In 1984, the Flemish Council decided to take up residence in Brussels together with the Flemish Executive and its ministeries. Because of the absence of censuses since 1947, it has been difficult to estimate the number of French and Netherlandic speakers. A minimum number of 200,000 Netherlandic speakers is to be assumed, and a maximum of approximately 550,000 Francophones. This rough

Η. van Veithoven estimate does not take into account certain intermediate situations such as the acculturated Flemish dialect users, nor does it consider the language use of the non-Belgian population (approximately 250,000). In the constitutional reform of 1970 the protection of the Walloon minority in the Belgian parliament was linked to guarantees for the Flemish minority in Brussels. Therefore, the Flemish majority in Parliament was restricted. First, the principle of the special majority for community matters was introduced (namely a majority in each language community and a 2/3rd majority for the whole of the votes); second, the alarm bell procedure (3/4 of the members of a language community can suspend a parliamentary procedure and refer a disputed issue to the National Council of Ministers) and finally, parity in the Council of Ministers. In a similar way the Flemish minority in the Brussels agglomeration was protected and gained participation in its administration. More particularly, a new supra-municipal institution was founded, called the District Council, - which was made competent for technical matters demanding a more efficient policy. Here again alarm bell and parity in the executive college were provided. However, an ingenious F.D.F. manoeuvre prevented the Flemish from participating in government after the election of a number of nonrepresentative Flemings. While waiting for readjustment measures, new elections for this Council have been postponed since 1977, which has resulted in an untenable situation both from a democratic and representative point of view. Meanwhile the F.D.F. was faced with an electoral decline from 40% in 1974 to 11% in 1985. This phenomenon will require more careful evaluation, though. The Flemish strategy consisted of installing authorities inside the Flemish community and making them responsible for cultural and so-called 'individualized' matters in Brussels. Arrangements were made when the cultural autonomy was carried through in 1970 and by the constitutional reform in 1980. This created Flemish unilingual institutions supporting the Flemish identity so that Netherlandic would become the competing standard language. A major instrument of policy was the Netherlandic Cultural Commission (NCC), elected by the Netherlandic-speaking representatives in the Brussels District Council, but dependent on the Flemish community. It is to take action when unwilling Brussels communal authorities fail to do so. Not only did the NCC greatly contribute to the development of the socio-cultural sector, but for the first time in the 140-year-history of Belgium an efficient Flemish educational network - starting from kindergarten - was established, thus guaranteeing an effective language choice. Consequently, for the first time earlier processes of language change

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

d.

e.

f.

25

were stopped, and a recuperation strategy propagating a training in bilingualism, was supported by the changing labour market. Bearing in mind that in 1971 the price for a Flemish educational infrastructure had been the Flemish approval of the reintroduction of the 'free choice by the head of the family', a change of mentality with the Flemings in Brussels had become a conditio sine qua non (see also Deprez and Wynants, in this volume). In the central administration and in the Brussels agglomeration equality of functions was realized. It was simpler in the central administration, but harder in the Brussels agglomeration. The (in 1963) required language parity in the higher functions was not at all reached in 1970 (28%-72%) but drastic measures would take care of this by 1979. The economic and cultural development of Flanders increased the daily Flemish presence in Brussels. This striking change of mentality was finally noticed by the Brussels private sector and by the Brussels shopkeepers (especially in a time of crisis!) so that the demand for bilingualism upon recruitment continued to grow. Still, from a Flemish point of view there remain quite a few weak and uncertain points such as: the problems with the District Council and the regional matters; the unwillingness of a number of Brussels communes; the effects of a possible new structure for the agglomeration by means of fusions of communes; the organization of health care; regulations for 4 bi-community' matters, the position of the 'acculturated' Flemish dialect speakers, the language use of foreigners and immigrants, etc. However, the tension between the two languages should not hide the urgent problems which both the Brussels Netherlandic-speaking and French-speaking populations are facing today. These structural problems are related to the overall decay of big cities: demographically (depopulation, aging population, the growing number of immigrants who - in 1984 - accounted for 40.7% of the total number of births in Brussels), economically and financially. Considering its multi-dimensional function (urban-local, regional, national, international) Brussels has every interest of becoming what should have been its historical function long ago: the link between Flanders and Wallonia.

The periphery For the Flemish communes situated in the countryside a straightening of the language frontier was observed, whereas in the nearby communes without facilities a stabilization or decrease of the number of Francophones took place. This suggests the disappearance of a favourable climate for immigration and a shift of the Francophone immigration to Walloon-

26

Η. van

Veithoven

Brabant and the six communes with language facilities. This process was boosted by several factors, such as: the greater economic attraction of Flanders and the loss of prestige of French-Brussels, the stronger consciousness of the Flemish identity, positive sensibilization campaigns, careful planning of housing projects, and a green belt converting building grounds into open space or rural areas, etc. The six communes with language facilities developed differently. The Francophones preferred these communes in which de facto bilingualism had now become officially regulated, more particularly the southern communes bordering the Walloon region. The percentage of Netherlandic speakers there decreased proportionally. Although the evolution had its political consequences, the impact was sometimes difficult to estimate, as it was influenced by local circumstances, election lists from the mayors and a heterogeneous electorate of natives, Francophone immigrants and Flemish immigrants. Officially the six communes with language facilities continued to belong to the Flemish region. Meanwhile the language use of the local authorities remained a matter of dispute. One of the six communes is Sint-Genesius-Rode, the southern corridor to Wallonia and as such an important goal of Brussels expansionism. After the very narrow Flemish electoral victory in 1976, the breakdown of actual bilingualism was set in with a minimal interpretation of the facilities. For both sides the result of this confrontation is an important testcase: can the process of frenchification in a strategic area be stopped at this stage?

REFERENCES The present synthesis of a 150-year-period has only been possible in expressionistic strokes, with inevitable omissions of some important nuances. Hence the schematic style and way of numbering. It owes much to the historical section presented by H. Van Velthoven (up to World War II) and by E. Witte (the following period), in: Witte, Ε. & Η. Baetens Beardsmore (eds.) (1987), The Interdisciplinary Study of Urban Bilingualism in Brussels. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. A selected bibliography can also be found in this book. Additional information in: Brüssel in beweging (1987) Derde Kongres Brusselse Viamingen. Dienst voor Cultuurpromotie, Brussels. Fonteyn, G. (1984) De zes faciliteitengemeenten. Grammens, Brussels. Heremans, D. & P. Van Cayseele (1982) Brüssel in de staatshervorming, een economische analyse. Acco, Louvain. Luykx, Th. & M. Platel (1985) Politieke geschiedenis van Belgie van 1789 tot 1985, 2 volumes, Kluwer, Antwerp. Sieben, L. (1986a) De politieke betrokkenheid van de Brusselse Viamingen na de Eerste Wereldoorlog, in Taal en Sociale Integratie 8, 3-84. Sieben, L. (1986b) De talentelling van 1920. De waarde en de betekenis van deze cijfers voor Brüssel, in Taal en Sociale Integratie 8, 461-481.

The Relationship between Flanders and Brussels

27

Van Impe, H. (1986) Staatsrechtelijke inventaris van Brüssel, in Taal en Sociale Integratie 8, 197-211. Witte, Ε. (1986) Centrumvorming in Belgie. De rol van Brüssel tijdens de stichtingsfase van de Belgische Staat (1830-1840), in Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de geschiedenis der Nederlanden 4, 601-629.

Minority Problems: On the Progress of Netherlandic Primary Education in Brussels Kas Deprez and Armel Wynants

1. A SHORT HISTORICAL SURVEY

Although there is not enough space here for a detailed history of the position of Netherlandic in primary education in Brussels, a certain historical perspective seems essential if one wants to fully appreciate the significance and the complexity of some recent developments in this domain which is, of course, of vital importance to the Flemish in Brussels. We have to go back to 1830 when together with the creation of the Belgian state a new language policy was brought into effect which, as is well known, was one of clear frenchification. Especially in Brussels, the bastion of triumphant Belgicism, Netherlandic was treated in a stepmotherly way. It was consequently given a very small place in primary education. The constitution guaranteed language freedom and freedom of education. The first implied, amongst other things, that the authorities could ignore Netherlandic in education; the second that they did not have to be concerned about education at all. This was very much the practice, especially in the first years following Independence. There were very few schools then, the teachers had received little or no training, and the introduction of compulsory education was still far away. Nobody was obliged to send his children to school. Those who did, selected a school of their own choice. Since education represented so little, its effects might be minimalized. Therefore, even if Netherlandic was much despised, one can surely not speak of any systematic frenchification through education with regard to that period. Rather than frenchifying them, Brussels primary schools turned Flemish children into bilingual illiterates, and this as a consequence of the minimal attention which was given to their mother tongue (Boon 1969). Important changes occurred around 1880, when under the impulse of some (mainly Francophone) progressive liberals (one of them being the well-known future mayor of Brussels, Karel Buls) a system of so-called transmutation classes was introduced. In this system Netherlandic was indeed given an important place since it constituted for the Flemish children a gradual transition from Netherlandic to French: in the first and second forms the children were taught in Netherlandic exclusively, in the third and fourth forms they were taught both in Netherlandic and French and

30 Κ. Deprez and A. Wynants in the fifth and sixth forms they were taught mainly in French. In other words, French remained the dominant language. Language choice in this system could hardly remain free. Indeed, no longer did the parents decide but the headmasters did instead: it was they who sent the children to Flemish or French classes, on the basis of their respective mother tongue. Because the number of schools had by then increased considerably, which meant that a lot more children could be reached, and because it was the mother tongue which from then on became quintessential, the Buls system led to ... systematic frenchification. Yet again, this occurred only in so far that the system was actually enforced; there was significant resistance from the part of the Francophones right from the beginning. Generally speaking the growing bilingualism of the Flemish was being used more and more against Netherlandic. Services for the Flemish with regard to administration and education were considered superfluous 'because most of them knew French anyway' (Van Velthoven 198 la,248). So, when in the 1910 linguistic census, only 16.4% of the inhabitants of Brussels declared to be Netherlandic monolinguals, the Buls system was finally done away with (Van Velthoven 1981b). From 1911 on separate Francophone and Netherlandic classes for all forms were established which turned out to be a real disaster for Netherlandic education: of the 30 Netherlandic classes in 1910 only three remained in 1911. Moreover, it was again the parents who decided in which language their children were to be educated. The 'head of the family's freedom', in French 'la liberte du pere de famille' became the corner stone of the Brussels language policy in education. The Flemish Movement, which in Flanders had already gained in importance considerably, could not but conclude that it had become impossible for the Netherlandic classes in Brussels to compete with the Francophone ones. The social pressure of French had become too heavy for most Flemish parents to be able to make a proper choice (even the socialist leaders in Brussels agreed that the Flemish workers would have to frenchify if they wanted to improve their social position; cf. Deneckere 1978). The Flemish children were now being frenchified massively (in 1914 compulsory education was introduced). The freedom of choice had to be cut short and this indeed happened with the new language laws in the thirties, the first major linguistic political compromise in this country, 100 years after Independence. For the first time Flanders became officially unilingual Netherlandic, Wallonia became unilingual Francophone - which it had always been - and Brussels, the capital, also for the first time, became officially bilingual. As to education the following principles were introduced: in Flanders and Wallonia the official language was also the language of education, in Brussels, however, education was to be given in the mother tongue. This meant that the 'liberte du pere de famille' was abolished again. From now on the head

Minority Problems

31

of the family at the registration of his child(ren) was to sign a declaration in which he stated which language was spoken at home. In cases of doubt, this statement was checked by the headmaster and by two language inspectors, a Flemish and a Francophone one. Infringements were to be punished severely. The new law did not solve the Flemish problem in Brussels. Flemish parents continued to send their children to Francophone schools. Consequently, Netherlandic primary education in Brussels continued to decline. Nevertheless, the Flemish leaders continued to insist upon the system of compulsory language declaration. For them obviously it was the only way to counter the frenchification of Flemish children in Brussels. This is why in 1963, when a new series of linguistic compromises was agreed upon, the legislation in this matter was preserved with the addition of a number of technical improvements (enabling among other things a more sufficient control). But Flemish schools went further downhill. Moreover, Francophones did not stop protesting against the compulsory system, and finally, in connection with another compromise which constituted the state reform of 1970-71 (see e.g. Rudolph 1982), the Flemish negotiators gave in. The head of the family again decided on the language in which his child was to be educated. The Flemish negotiators could still extract some compensations however: e.g. a considerable number of Flemish day-care centres were to be created, and in Flemish primary schools the norm for splitting up classes would be lowered significantly (see Swing 1980). The newly created Netherlandic Culture Commission (NCC) was authorized to supervise Netherlandic education in Brussels. These compensations made little impression, certainly not on the Flemish side. Flemish nationalists, but they were not the only ones to be sure, considered the restoration of the 'liberte du pere de famille' to be a deadly blow or even a fatal capitulation with respect to a fundamental issue. Hence, the complete frenchification of Netherlandic primary education in Brussels was predicted (cfr. Ruys 1979,201).

2. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

2.1. The total school population One has to admit that things did not look promising in the seventies. This can be concluded from table 1 in which a survey is given of the numbers of pupils in Netherlandic and Francophone primary education in Brussels since 1968 (the figures for kindergartens and primary schools are given separately). Especially primary schools received some heavy blows: they lost one third of their pupils between 1971 and 1979! But also

32 Κ. Deprez and A. Wynants kindergartens suffered badly - between 1971 and 1979 the number of infants fell from 5,654 to 4,377 (a loss of 22.6%). Remarkably enough, however, Francophone primary education also started to decline, and this for the first time in its history! From then on, a more general and quite fundamental phenomenon would have to be reckoned with viz. the overall decline of the Brussels population. This was manifested for the first time in 1968, and has since re-occurred almost every year. In the seventies it was due both to a falling birthrate and to an urban exodus (only the second factor is still relevant today). Given this demographic background, what has been happening in Netherlandic primary education since the end of the seventies is all the more remarkable. The relative school population in Netherlandic-speaking kindergartens vis ä vis the total school population in Brussels increased for the first time in 1979, and in 1980 the absolute number of children also went up. Both have continued to increase. In 1985 the Flemish kindergartens even counted 561 children more than in 1971. In primary schools progress was less spectacular and is also more recent: there has been a relative increase since 1982 and an increase of the absolute number of pupils since 1984. However, this still means a setback of 5,866 pupils compared to 1971. Yet the trend has changed direction,which, for the time being, does not seem to be the case in the Francophone schools: (a) in the Francophone kindergartens progress was noted again only in the last year for which figures are available, (b) the primary schools have been declining now for more than ten years. 2.2. Nationality The total population of Brussels has been decreasing almost every year for the last twenty years, but the number of foreigners has increased spectacularly during the same period. They now constitute about 25% of the Brussels population, and of this number more than 80% are migrant workers. In the future, their number will still increase as a result of the high birthrate they enjoy. In table 2 the Netherlandic school population of Brussels is split up according to nationality: Belgians vs. non-Belgians (in view of future comparisons table 2 is not based upon the statistics of the Ministry of Education, but on the censuses organised by the NCC at the beginning of every schoolyear in the Brussels Netherlandic primary schools). From this table one can conclude that the Netherlandic schools have hardly been affected by the above-mentioned demographic revolution. The number of children with foreign nationality has indeed doubled since 1978, yet their relative strength has remained very limited. In the kindergartens it

Minority Problems

33

has risen from 6.07% to 11.09%, and in primary education from 3.61% to 6.64%. The latter figures are much lower than in the Francophone schools. According to the statistics provided by the Ministere de l'Education the percentage of children with a foreign nationality in 1980 already amounted to 45.27% in the Francophone kindergartens, and to 41.03% in the primary schools. Since the Francophone schools have been going down - and as far as the primary schools are concerned are still going down -, in spite of this influx of foreign children, their loss of Belgian children must have been considerable over the past 15 years (we do not have exact figures). Also in this respect Netherlandic primary education has done better: together with the number of children with a foreign nationality, also the number of children with a Belgian nationality has been on the increase in recent years (table 2). The question remains of the linguistic background of those Belgian children which, indeed, now appears to have become the most crucial factor. 2.3. Linguistic Background In the NCC-censuses four sociolinguistic categories are distinguished on the basis of the family's home language: homogeneous Netherlandic-speaking families, mixed families (Netherlandic - French), homogeneous Francophone families and families speaking other languages. The results of these censuses can be found in table 3. It is quite clear that the Flemish schools in Brussels in recent years have begun to attract more and more children from mixed and homogeneous Francophone families, a conclusion which should not come as a surprise if one has paid attention to what has been said above. This means that more and more parents who used to prefer a Francophone education, are now using their 'liberte du pere de famille' to choose for a Flemish school. This was not expected at all in 1971. We know from an exploratory investigation (Deprez, Persoons, Struelens and Wynants 1984) that these families prefer a Flemish school for three reasons: (1) the excellent infrastructure in many schools, which to a certain extent is due to the 1971 compensations; (2) the small number of children of foreign workers in the Flemish schools; (3) the growing importance of bilingualism in Brussels.

34 Κ. Deprez and A. Wynants The last factor would seem to be the most important one. Between 1979 and 1985 (see table 3) the number of children from mixed families was doubled, the number of children from homogeneous Francophone families was more than tripled, and the number of children from families speaking other languages was also more than tripled. The number of children from homogeneous Netherlands families, on the contrary, has decreased. In the kindergartens this negative evolution has more or less been stopped as far as the absolute figures are concerned, but in the primary schools their numbers keep dropping rather drastically, both in the absolute and the relative sense. As a result, this language category, which should constitute the natural population of Netherlandic primary education in Brussels, now only accounts for 46.82% of the total school population in the kindergartens, and 66.39% in the primary schools. Moreover, a large-scale investigation carried out at the request of the NCC, has shown that if the data are gathered on a more solid basis, the latter percentages in reality are still much smaller than has been assumed so far.

3. A LARGE-SCALE INVESTIGATION

In February 1984 the NCC decided to set up a large-scale investigation in order to collect more detailed information on the present population in the Netherlandic primary education. Fourteen co-workers were engaged for one year, first to contact (with the help of the headmasters and teachers concerned) all families with one or more children in the Flemish kindergartens and primary schools and second to confront them with a structured questionnaire. Principal investigators were K. Deprez, Y. Persoons and A. Wynants whereas H. Weckx an J. Junius, both from the NCC, assumed overall responsibility. The questionnaire consisted of two parts: the first one dealt with the child, the second one with the family. The investigation started in September 1984 and thus involved the schoolyear 1984-1985. The fact that approximately one tenth of the families could not be reached had nothing to do with lack of dedication on the part of the fieldworkers or a negative attitude towards the project in many families (the number of individual refusals being only around three hundred). It was the (Flemish) communal authorities in Brussels and Anderlecht (2 out of the agglomeration's 19 communes) who refused to cooperate; the schools of the communal network in Brussels and Anderlecht represented some 1,500 children at the time. Lack of space forces us to concentrate in the following discussion on the two aspects that have been dealt with so far, viz. nationality and linguistic background.

Minority Problems

35

3.1. Nationality In the investigation the percentage of children with a foreign nationality is 0.5% higher than in the 1984 NCC-census, namely 9.48%. Their number therefore remains very restricted. When looking into the different foreign nationalities separately, we see that here very small groups are involved, some of which are even taken care of to a certain extent through the bi-cultural education programs organized by the Foyer (see the article by L. Smeekens in this volume). We counted 2% Italians, 1% French, 1% Spaniards, 1% Moroccans, 1% Turks etc. The percentages are even lower when taking the parents' nationalities into account. It then appears that a lot of foreign children come from families in which only one partner is foreign, the other one being Belgian. Eventually only 5% of the children come from a completely foreign family (and in a number of instances that family is wholly or partly Dutch). Still, the fact remains that the number of children with a non-Belgian nationality is increasing. Also, per schoolyear a clear progression can be witnessed. In 1984 there were only 54 foreign children in the sixth grade, 143 in the first grade and already 312 in the first year of kindergarten. 3.2. Linguistic background The differences with regard to the children's linguistic background are a lot more spectacular. This is clearly illustrated in table 4, in which the results of the investigation are compared with the results of the NCCcensus. The criterium used in table 4 is the family's home language, this being the alleged criterium applied in the NCC-statistics. In the investigation the category of children from homogeneous Francophone families scores definitely higher than in the NCC-statistics, namely 7% in kindergartens and 4% in primary schools. The category of children from mixed families also scores higher: 6% in kindergartens and even 11% in primary schools. Eventually, the percentage of children from homogeneous Netherlandic families appears to be a lot lower than has been assumed so far on the basis of the NCC-figures: 14% in kindergartens and 16% in primary education! In 1984-85 therefore, only 34% of the children in kindergartens and 54% in primary education came from a homogeneous Netherlandic family (45% of the total school population). How can these differences be explained? The NCC-censuses are carried out by the headmasters. It is clear that, as far as the overall result is concerned, they do their counting job carefully. In the past their figures differed only slightly from the official figures of the Ministry of Education which were issued afterwards. But the sum totals are a result of counting

36 Κ. Deprez and A. Wynants heads only; it is far more difficult to make a classification in terms of linguistic categories. In many cases the headmasters apparently do not have enough information at their disposal: they do not know the family well enough, rely on their personal impressions, vaguely remember something, know from hearsay that etc. It is also very likely that they handle various sociolinguistic variables without any distinction, which - as we find ourselves in a Flemish school - eventually tends to favour Netherlandic. This would mean that as soon as they discover some trace of Netherlandic in the family's present or past, they label the family bilingual or even homogeneous Netherlandic. That is, we are dealing here with some kind of cumulative effect. This is but one important reason for distinguishing various sociolinguistic criteria. In the investigation we have worked with the following ones: (1) the mother tongue of both parents; (2) the school language of both parents; (3) the home language of the family, i.e. the language the parents speak with each other and with their children; (4) the language the children use among each other at home; (5) the subjective identification of the family. The fourth variable will not be discussed here any further; some 30% of the families appeared to have only one child. In table 5 the percentage of children per linguistic category are presented according to the remaining four criteria (which, as stated above, are to be see^ as characteristics of the family). We then observe that the category of homogeneous Netherlandic families scores equally low for all these criteria - for school language they score even 5% lower. That is to say that whichever way we look at it, the results for this category are considerably lower than expected. The problem of the children's linguistic background is even more striking when we look at the percentages per form, as in table 6 (here we limit ourselves to the most important categories). When going from the sixth form to the first year of kindergarten, that is from the oldest children to the youngest, we can see that the percentage of children from homogeneous Netherlandic families has decreased dramatically: from 64% to 33%. The percentage of children from homogeneous Francophone families on the other hand has increased spectacularly:from a negligeable 7% to almost a quarter. Also the percentage of children from mixed families is on the increase, but there the gains are rather limited.

Minority Problems

37

4. CONCLUSION

For a number of years the NCC has pursued a strategy which aims at regaining for Flemish schools those families which are wholly or partially Netherlandic and which send their children to Francophone schools. From the 1979 'Market Segmentation Inquiry' that was also conducted at the request of the NCC, it appeared that a lot of recovery could indeed be done. It was then observed that more children from homogeneous Netherlandic families attended Francophone schools than Netherlandic ones (7,000 vs. 5,600)! Furthermore, one had also learned that only a small part of the children from mixed families attended Netherlandic schools (3,200 vs. 20,000). The latter category apparently would seem to constitute a very important segment of the market and has, moreover, sufficient links with the Netherlandic tongue to opt for Flemish schools in the first place. The NCC claims not to be interested in children from homogeneous Francophone families who they believe had better attend a Francophone school. But it is precisely with this category that the greatest gains have been made. In addition to the homogeneous Francophone families many mixed families also have an undeniable Francophone character; they are bilingual, but French is by far the more important language. Furthermore among families speaking other languages, it is again French rather than Netherlandic that will be chosen as a second language. In short, the groups of non-Netherlandic children in the Brussels Flemish primary schools have grown considerably over the last few years; they have grown to such an extent that in the first year of kindergarten they already constitute two thirds of the total population! It is evident that such an outspoken presence of French in several schools may cause great problems. To begin with there are problems of a pedagogical nature since the level of education may go down if in a classroom the greater part of the pupils does not have a decent command of the language of instruction. And this very situation will inevitably bring about identity problems as well for how can a school keep its Netherlandic character when the greater part of its population consists of non-Netherlandic speaking people (children and parents)? And, finally, what to say about the defensive reactions of some Flemish spokesmen who claim that Francophones are using a Netherlandic education only to strengthen their own position - they will not become Flemings but remain bilingual Francophones. It is obvious that Netherlandic primary education in Brussels is facing a major challenge, precisely because of its unexpected, perhaps too rapid progress. Having come this long way it would seem that even progress may create serious problems.

38

Κ. Deprez and A. Wynants

REFERENCES Boon, H. (1969) Enseignement primaire et alphabetisation dans l'agglomeration bruxelloise de 1830 έ 1879, Publications Universitäres de Lou vain, Louvain. Deneckere, M. (1978) Socialisme en Vlaamse Beweging te Brüssel (1885-1914), in Taal en Sociale Integrate 1, 237-259. Deprez, Κ., Y. Persoons, M. Struelens and A. Wynants (1984) Les non-neerlandophones dans l'enseignement de langue neerlandaise k Bruxelles. Qui et pourquoi?, in Recherches Sociologiques 15 (1), 117-146. Marktsegmentatie-onderzoek (1979) Marketing Development, Brussels. Rudolph, J.R. (1982) Belgium: controlling separatist tendencies in a multinational state, in C.H.Williams (ed.), National separatism, University of Wales Press, Cardiff, 263-297. Ruys, M. (1979) The Flemings. A people on the move, a nation in being, Lannoo, Tielt/ Amsterdam. Swing, E.S. (1980) Bilingualism and linguistic segregation in the schools of Brussels, International Center for Research on Bilingualism, Quebec. Van Velthoven, Η (1981a) De taalwetgeving en het probleem Brüssel, 1830-1914, in Taal en Sociale Integratie 4, 247-259. Van Velthoven, H. (1982b) Taal en onderwijspolitiek te Brüssel, 1878-1914, in Taal en Sociale Integratie 4, 261-387.

Minority

Problems

tu 2 .•3 Jυ=

Ο ο J= οC υ

s

η

Β

ϊ

i

3 1 β *

fc. Ο

ί

I

ξ 5

5

Μ

I

I

g e

*

I

«

β ·~ § 15

s I -c k. β

gesjriews [ya/Ri-ws] - (the) shouting.

5a: Derivation 1: ge-X-s NEIG

BD

VP

TOT

F

Sign

G 1 Ε 2 Ν 3

0.11 0.07 0.10

0.10 0.17 0.00

0.11 0.12 0.05

0.43

n.s.

0.10

0.10

0.10

TOT F Sign

0.00 n.s.

118 Η. Münstermann 5b: Derivation 2: X-etig NEIG

BD

VP

TOT

F

Sign

G1 Ε 2 Ν3

0.50 0.53 0.31

0.47 0.69 0.43

0.48 0.61 0.37

1.83

n.s.

0.45

0.53

0.49

F

Sign

4.28

0.02

TOT F Sign

0.63 n.s.

5c: Derivation 3: X-igheid NEIG

BD

VP

TOT

G 1 Ε 2 Ν3

0.86 0.52 0.42

0.75 0.70 0.51

0.80

0.59

0.66

0.63

TOT F Sign

0.61 0.47

2.17 n.s.

5d: Derivation 4: X-se NEIG

BD

VP

TOT

F

Sign

G 1 Ε 2 Ν3

0.32 0.19 0.00

0.34 0.41 0.00

0.33 0.30 0.00

11.76

0.00

0.16

0.26

0.21

TOT F Sign

1.92 n.s.

Dialect loss in Maastricht: Attitudes, Functions and Structures

119

5e: Derivation: Sum NEIG

BD

VP

TOT

G 1 Ε 2 Ν3

0.45 0.33 0.21

0.42 0.49 0.24

0.43 0.41

0.77

0.84

TOT F Sign

F 6.99

Sign 0.00

0.22

1.22

n.s.

Table 5: Mean scores on a series of derivation tests broken down by neighbourhood (NEIG) and generation (GEN) (BD=Blauw Dörrep; VP=Villapark). Results of analysis of variance.

Apparently the contrast between dialect and standard Netherlandic has almost completely dissappeared. This is quite understandable if we assume that similarity in rules between two systems will provoke levelling. On the other hand, highly transparent rules are supposed to be rather resistant. A regular derivation principle like ge+stem+$ certainly looks transparent. These two tendencies seem to be in conflict with one another here and clearly similarity is the strongest. Yet, we could also assume that similarity was helped in this case by the fact that the standard Netherlandic derivation rule is simpler, because only one affix is used, and therefore more attractive. The second derivation principle derives adjectives from verb stems with the suffix -etig. The standard Netherlandic equivalent is -erig but in the dialects the forms may also have the same function as the present participle. An example: from "gleuje" [yla'p] - to glow verb stem = gleuj [7I0J] verb stem + suffix -etig [atiX] => gleujetig [ylojatiX] "glowing" Table 5b shows that the scores spread around the middle, in other words the use of the dialect suffix has become optional. No significant differences were found for the three generations, nor for the two neighbourhoods. The third principle is derivation of nouns from adjectives with the suffix -igheid, corresponding to standard Netherlandic -heid and something like English -ness. An example: from "meuj" [m0j] - tired adjective + -igheid [-9X(h)eit] => meujegheid [m0jaXeit] - tiredness

120 Η. Münstermann vs. standard Netherlandic: adjective + he id [heit] => moeheid [muheit] This principle shows significant loss over the three generations. Nevertheless, the use in the younger generation still demonstrates optionality in the use of the dialect suffix. So, in general this principle proves to be more resistant than the other two. Probably this is due to the fact that the geographical spread of this principle is much greater than that of the other principles discussed. It is not only most dialects in the province of Limburg that use this derivation, but also most Brabantic dialects do so. Perhaps the principle could even be regarded as general sub-standard Netherlandic. An old distinction in dialectology made by Schirmunsky (1930) and reanimated by Hinskens (1986) claims that there are primary and secondary dialect features. Primary features are restricted to only one dialect while secondary features are shared by a group of dialects. The hypothesis that secondary features stand stronger in a process of dialect loss is obvious. It seems to be confirmed by the scores in table 5d. The last of the four derivation principles goes back to middle Netherlandic (or Limburgian). It is the derivation of nouns indicating female persons from nouns ending in -er or -aar, indicating male persons, by adding the suffix -se e.g. ''naobef-'naober-se'

meaning neighbour m + f, resp.

Clearly this derivation principle has been lost completely, as can be seen from the scores of the younger generation in table 5d. Also the knowledge of the principle in the middle and older generations was not very convincing, so that we can assume that the principle has been optional for a long time. In table 5e the results for the four derivations are summarized in sum scores. The general pattern is that there is significant loss over the three generations, but no difference between the two neighbourhoods. Also the scores were far from maximal for all of the subgroups, which means that for quite a long time there has been variation in the application of these derivation principles. In this case, the apparent variation was a sign of approaching dialect loss, since the results of the younger generation show only very little resistance to the standard alternatives. The four principles could be ordered along an implicational scale. Apparently there is an increasing amount of difficulty in the items, i.e. a decreasing amount of knowledge of the derivation principles. However, the order of the informants on the other axis of the scale model reflected the presupposed effects of sex, neighbourhood and generation only for a small part. Clearly there are other variables that help determine an

Dialect loss in Maastricht: Attitudes, Functions and Structures

121

informant's knowledge of dialect features. In future research in this field, a more refined set of independent (more individual) variables should be used. In addition to these and other production tests, an acceptability test was administered. For 84 audiotaped sentences the informants were asked to indicate whether they considered them to be instances of the correct Maastricht dialect or not. In case of a negative reaction they were asked to give an adequate correction. In fact the 84 sentences, offered in random order, constituted 42 pairs of sentences. The two sentences in a pair differed only in one element or structure, one sentence containing the original dialect variant, the other containing a loss-variant. Each of the investigated phenomena was represented in the test with several instances. The scores were calculated as follows: 0 points for approval of a loss variant and for disapproval of an original variant; 1 point for approval of an original variant and for disapproval of a loss variant (if adequately corrected). So, for each of the pairs a score between 0 and 2 was calculated. The variables in the test were diminutive formation, plural formation, verb conjugation, pronominal substitution, inflexion of adjectives, pronominal adverbs and adjectives with suffix -etig. A detailed discussion of the results of this test can be found in Münstermann & Hagen (1986). They are summarized in tables 6 and 7 as far as the differences between the agegroups and the two neighbourhoods are concerned. Obviously there is less dialect loss shown in the acceptability test than in the production tests. Either the informants are positive towards original variants which they themselves do not use, or they are rigorous in rejecting new variants, although they use them themselves. The latter possibility reminds us of Labov's finding that informants' claims about the use or non-use of certain variables do not correctly reflect their actual use or non-use of these variables in spontaneous speech or elicitation tests (Labov 1972). That is also why the correlations between comparable variables from the production tests and the acceptability test are rather low (they generally do not exceed 0.35). Here, dialect loss is most obvious in the verb system. For this test instances were chosen of verbs that have a weak conjugation in the dialect and a strong conjugation in standard Netherlandic (e.g. dialect: 'sjuive - sjuivde - gesjuif vs. standard: 'schuiven - schoof geschoven', 'to shove'). The past tense, as well as the past participle show dialect loss in a comparison over the three generations. A comparison of the scores to the theoretical maximum of 2, however, reveals that the loss has been greater for the past tense than for the past participle. This may seem strange for we are quite used to the idea of coherence of these two verb tenses. Possibly the lower frequency of the past tense in spontaneous speech is due to differents. In the dialect, as well as in standard

122 Η. Münstermann VARIABLE

GEN

MEAN

S.D.

Diminutive formation

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

1.52 1.55 1.39 1.55 1.46 1.40 0.88 0.76 0.43 1.33 1.15 0.96 1.10 0.95 0.69 1.56 1.52 1.16 1.83 1.79 1.65 1.92 1.83 1.65 1.04 1.02 1.02 1.19 1.09 1.09

0.23 0.24 0.19 0.17 0.25 0.27 0.44 0.37 0.38 0.27 0.49 0.27 0.27 0.39 0.26 0.22 0.34 0.41 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.15 0.24 0.35 0.16 0.08 0.15 0.25 0.46 0.52

1 2 3

1.42 1.30 1.15

0.11 0.15 0.14

Pluralization

Verbs: past tense

Verbs: past participle

Verbs: past 4- perfect

Verbs: vowel mutation

Pronominal substitution

Inflexion of adjectives

Pronominal adverbs

Adjectives on -etig

Total test score

F

SIG]

2.59

0.09

1.82

n.s.

5.55

0.01

4.41

0.02

7.24

0.00

7.18

0.00

1.71

n.s.

4.46

0.02

0.12

n.s.

0.26

n.s.

15.35

0.00

Table 6: Results of the acceptability test broken down by generation (from Münstermann & Hagen 1986)

Netherlandic, in casual style, events in the past may also be referred to by using perfect tense and by the frequently used praesens narrativum.

Dialect loss in Maastricht: Attitudes, Functions and Structures

123

Another remarkable fact is the amount of dialect loss found in the verb system. Dialect loss, as it is found here, means a decrease of regularity, because weak and therefore unmarked forms are substituted by strong forms. There is of course the possibility that these forms are modelled after strong equivalent forms in the dialect, but a lot more likely is the thought that they follow their correspondents in the standard language. The first two variables in the table are also often thought to go together. They are plural formation and diminutive formation. Plural formation in the dialect is very complex and highly untransparent. There are at least six types of plural formation not counting the numerous exceptions. Partly, plural formation is phonologically conditioned but for a lot of nouns the plurals can only be learned individually. This means that according to the hypothesis that more complex and less transparent structures are more vulnerable to language loss (Andersen 1982), we would expect considerable deviations from the theoretical maximum, as well as significant differences between the generations. As we can see neither is the case. The complex system of plural formation turns out to be one of the most resistant variables in the test. The same goes for diminutive formation, except for the fact that diminutive formation is far from complex (there is Umlaut whenever possible and the choice of the suffix is phonologically determined). Some examples: Simplex book [bo k] "book"

Plural beuk [be k]

Diminutive beukske [bo kska]

vrouw [vRou] woman

vrouwe [vRouwa]

vruijke [vRoeyka]

lief [lif] "body"

liever [livaR]

lijjfke [leifka]

Therefore it is the more strange that, in spite of the high scores for diminutive formation, there is significant loss over the three generations. We cannot discuss the results of all variables in this test (see Münstermann & Hagen 1986), but we do want to point to the strong resistance of the more complex system of the inflexion of adjectives. Although the younger generation is scoring significantly lower than the older and the middle generations, they still have a score of 1.65, which is over 80% in favour of original variants. So, it seems that the hypothesis mentioned above is falsified more than once. However, this or a similar hypothesis can hardly be falsified or verified, for that could only be done if complexity were objectively quantified, which seems almost impossible.

124 Η. Münstermann VARIABLE

GEN

MEAN

S.D.

Diminutive formation

BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP BD VP

1.47 1.55 1.48 1.54 0.81 0.53 1.22 1.14 1.02 0.83 1.35 1.53 1.74 1.72 1.77 1.89 1.02 1.02 1.17 1.17

0.23 0.22 0.21 0.26 0.45 0.43 0.41 0.36 0.34 0.36 0.32 0.35 0.31 0.33 0.30 0.22 0.12 0.15 0.39 0.49

BD VP

1.30 1.34

0.17 0.17

Pluralization Verbs: past tense Verbs: past participle Verbs: past + perfect Verbs: vowel mutation Pronominal substitution Inflexion of adjectives Pronominal adverbs Adjectives on -etig

Total test score

F

SIGN

1.89

n.s.

0.78

n.s.

6.60

0.01

0.75

n.s.

4.37

0.04

4.47

0.04

0.07

n.s.

3.08

0.08

0.00

n.s.

0.00

n.s.

1.07

n.s.

Table 7: Results of the acceptability test broken down by neighbourhood (from Münstermann & Hagen 1986).

In table 7 the results of the acceptability test are broken down by neighbourhood. As in the results of the production tests, significant differences between the two groups are not very frequent. Also, the effects that reach significance do not point in the same direction. The vowel mutation in irregular verbs, for instance, demonstrates more resistance in the Villapark, the higher socio-economic group. The weak conjugation for verbs with a strong conjugation in standard Netherlandic is preferred to a higher degree in Blauw Dörrep. As information from native speakers of the dialect confirms, realisation of the weak conjugation is socially stigmatized, albeit that the weak conjugation is the original one. This is one of the few cases that confirm the assumption of a parallel between social variation and historical variation. Since the data also give instances that violate this assumption, we cannot, for the time being, conclude that the dialect of the lower socio-economic group is more conservative or

Dialect loss in Maastricht: Attitudes, Functions and Structures

125

resistant than that of the higher socio-economic group. That is, at least, for morphological variables. For all the variables discussed for the production tests as well as the acceptability test, the effect of the variable sex was investigated. Given the results of much sociolinguistic research, we were to assume that the female informants would show stronger preference for standard forms and thus demonstrate more dialect loss. In Hoppenbrouwers (1983) this was clearly the case. In the Maastricht data, however, there were hardly any significant differences between male and female informants. In the few cases in which a significant effect was found, the female informants even turned out to have more knowledge of the dialect than the male ones. Since this is a rather unique finding, it needs a little elaboration. First, it must be stressed that these tests measure the knowledge of the dialect, which clearly differs from the actual use of the dialect. Therefore it is conceivable that, although the females appeared to have greater knowledge of original dialect forms and rules, they do not use them more frequently than the males. Second, the finding that women are more directed towards standard language than men came, almost without exception, from situations in which a low status variety coexists with a standard language. Women would seek to derive prestige from the standard language (cf. Trudgill 1974). Since, as was demonstrated in the attitude scores and the reported use scores, the Maastricht dialect is not a low status variety, this argument has no value in this context. Even the reverse could be the case here, if we assume that women could also derive prestige from a better knowledge of the dialect. Third, it is possible that education of children plays a part. As quite a few female informants stated, they wished to teach their children 'pure dialect', which implies reflection on dialect grammar. This reflection is also necesary to keep dialect and standard language from interfering with one another. 2.4. Relations In order to investigate some of the relations between the three components of the investigation, correlation coefficients were calculated. First, of course, we were interested in the relationship between dialect loss in the linguistic sense and dialect loss in the functional sense. The values of the correlation coefficients were quite low. Only the instrumentalism-factor in the reported -use questionnaire showed some relation with linguistic variables, so, roughly, the more the informants use the dialect in official, formal or transactional situations the greater their knowledge of the dialect. There is no correlation worth mentioning between the solidarity-factor and the family-factor on the one hand and linguistic variables on the other.

126 Η. Münstermann There are several explanations possible for this outcome. The first one lies in the meaning and understanding of the word 'dialect'. When we asked the informants to what extent they used the dialect of Maastricht in the given situations, we left it to their interpretation of what they should consider to be dialect. Apparently for our informants even a variety of the dialect with many features of dialect loss is still considered to be dialect, which is of course justified by the numerous remaining contrasts between dialect and standard language. A second explanation could be that the relation between the two types of dialect loss is not linear (which is what the Pearson coefficient presupposes). In fact, this relation could not be linear in this investigation because of the small variance in the reporteduse data, at least for the family and solidarity factors. The relation between reported use and the attitude variables suffers from the same problem. The small variance in both types of variables causes rather low correlations. As we saw, the attitudes were very positive and did not discriminate between the subgroups in the sample. For the reported use variables there were significant differences between the two neighbourhoods. We concluded that a process of social stereotyping of speaking the dialect in a number of situations had started. Yet, however obvious this conclusion may be, it was not supported by the attitudinal variables. Another explanation for the significant differences in the amount of dialect use between the two neighbourhoods should be taken into account viz., that in all likelihood the upper middle class group has more contact with the standard language (work, education). Although the relations between the separate attitudinal variables and the reported-use variables was almost negligible, a combination of attitudinal variables, including the suitability scores, appeared to be more useful. In a multiple regression analysis the multiple correlations between the attitude variables and the reported-use variables were about .50, which allows for more optimism. Other possible relations have not yet been examined thoroughly. Still, we must conclude that, although there are relations between the components in the investigation, these relations are not extremely strong, and in most cases certainly not linear.

3. SUMMARY

In this paper some results of an investigation into dialect loss in Maastricht have been discussed. For a number of linguistic variables elicited in production tests or presented in an acceptability test a clear decrease of the original variants was shown over the three generations. Also in most of the cases there was considerable loss in comparison with a theoretical maximum score, constructed on the basis of dialectological sources.

Dialect loss in Maastricht: Attitudes, Functions and Structures

127

For some variables there were differences between the two socioeconomically contrasting neighbourhoods. Yet, these differences were not so frequent to confirm the assumption of a parallel between social variation and historical variation in morphology. This parallel probably exists on the phonetic level. In spite of what might have been expected from former research, women were not ahead in the process of dialect loss. There were hardly any differences between the results of male and female informants, and even if we found significant differences they pointed in the direction of women having a better knowledge of original dialect variants. In the results of the reported-use questionnaire a difference was shown between the two neighbourhoods. The informants in the working class neighbourhood appeared to be more frequent dialect speakers. Also for one of the reported-use variables, instrumentalism, significant differences were found between the generations. This effect is mainly due to the rather strong decrease of the use of the dialect by the informants in the upper middle class neighbourhood. This finding brings us to the conclusion that a process of social stereotyping of the use of the dialect in instrumental situations has started. The attitudes towards the dialect and the community were not only very positive, but they were also shared by the entire sample. No significant differences for any of the attitude variables were found between the various subgroups. A last remark that should be made is that, although dialect loss was clearly demonstrated, the position of the dialect in Maastricht is still strong. It must not be forgotten that the variables were chosen to show the process of dialect loss. The results reveal that there is also considerable dialect maintenance, and even some dialect restauration. Given the high amount of dialect use and the extremely positive attitudes, this conclusion fits the overall picture very well.

REFERENCES Andersen, R. (1982) Determining the linguistic attributes of language loss, in R. Lambert & B . Freed (eds.), 83-118. Bourhis, R., H. Giles & D. Rosenthal (1981) Notes on the construction of a subjective vitality questionnaire. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 2, 144-155. Chambers, J. & P. Trudgill (1980) Dialectology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Creten, J., K.Jaspaert & G. Geerts (eds.) (1986) Werk-in-uitvoering. Momentopname van de sociolingu'istiek in Belgie en Nederland, Acco, Leuven/Amersfoort. De Bot, C.L.J.& H.H.G. Weltens (1985) Taalverlies, beschrijven versus verklaren, in Handelingen van het 38e Nederlands Filologencongres, ΑΡΑ-Holland Universiteits Pers, Maarssen, 51-62.

128

Η. Münstermann

Dorian, Ν. (1981) Language death. The lifecycle of a Scotttish Gaelic dialect, The University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Endepols, Η. (1948) Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands of la force d'intercourse et l'esprit de clocher, I en II, Tijdschrift voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde 65, 101-114 and 194-208. Freed, B. (1982) Language loss: current thoughts and future directions, in R. Lambert & B. Freed (eds.), 1-5. Gal, S. (1979) Language Shift. Social determinants of linguistic change in bilingual Austria, Academic Press, New York. Giles, H. & R. St. Clair (eds.) (1979) Language and Social Psychology, Blackwell, Oxford. Göschel, J. et al. (eds.) (1976) Zur Theorie des Dialekts, Steiner, Wiesbaden. Hill, J. (1978) Language death, language contact and language evolution, in W. McCormack & S. Wurm (eds.), 45-78. Hinskens, F. (1986) Primaire en secundaire dialectkenmerken. Een onderzoek naar de bruikbaarheid van een vergeten (?) onderscheid, in J. Creten et al. (eds.), 135-158. Hoppenbrouwers, C. (1983) Het genus in een Brabants regiolect, Tabu 13, 1-25. Jaspaert, K., S. Kroon & R. Van Hout (1986) Points of reference in first-language loss research, in B. Weltens et al. (eds.), 37-49. Kloss, H. (1976) Abstandsprachen und Ausbausprachen, in J. Göschel et al. (eds.), 301322. Labov, W. (1972) Sociolinguistic Patterns, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Lambert, R. & B. Freed (eds.) (1982) The loss of language skills, Newbury House, Rowley, Mass.. Lambert, W.E., R.C. Hodgson, R.C. Gardner & S. Fillenbaum (1960) Evaluational reactions to spoken languages, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60, 44-51. Lousberg, M. (1961) De taalsituatie in Maastricht en Eijsden, M.A. thesis, University of Nijmegen. McCormack, W. & S. Wurm (eds.) (1978) Approaches to language. Anthropological Issues, Mouton, The Hague. Münstermann, Η. (1986) De vitaliteit van het Maastrichts. Resultaten van een onderzoek naar functionele en structurele aspecten van dialectverlies, Taal en Tongval 18(3/4), 109127. Münstermann, Η. & Α. Hagen (1986) Functional and structural aspects of dialect loss. A research plan and some first results, in B. Weltens et al. (eds.), 75-96. Münstermann, Η. & R. Van Hout (1986) Taalattitudes contra geschiktheid en gebruik, in J. Creten et al. (eds.), 235-249. Oxford, R. (1982) Issues in designing and conducting research in language skill attrition, in R. Lambert & B. Freed (eds.), 119- 137. Ryan, E.B. (1979) Why do low-prestige varieties persist? in H. Giles & R. StClair (eds.), 147-157. Schirmunsky, V. (1930) Sprachgeschichte und Siedlungsmundarten, Germanisch Romanische Monatschrift 18, 171-188. Trudgill, P. (1974) The social differentiation of English in Norwich City, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Van Hout, R. & H. Münstermann (1988) The multidimensionality of domain configurations, International Journal of the Sociology of Language 74, 107-124. Weltens, Β., Κ. De Bot & Th. Van Eis (1986) Language attrition in progress, Foris publications, Dordrecht/Providence.

Determining the Explanatory Factors of t/d Deletion in the Dialect of Nijmegen Roeland van Hout

0. INTRODUCTION

The linguistic variable studied most extensively in American literature on language variation is by far the deletion of the word final t/d in consonant clusters (for instance in words like 'eas(t)', 'bol(d)', 'walk(ed)*). Also in studies on language variation in the Netherlandic language area, the deletion of the word final t/d is the most popular linguistic variable. At least three reasons can be given to explain the attractiveness of this deletion phenomenon: 1. 2. 3.

the deletion process is marked by social and geographical variation; a great variety of (interacting) linguistic factors or parameters is influencing the deletion process; the deletion process seems to operate at various linguistic levels; differences have been found which are to be traced back to phonetic/ phonological, morphological as well as lexical regularities.

In this contribution data will be discussed and analysed which have been gathered in a sociolinguistic survey of the Dutch town of Nijmegen. Nijmegen, which has about 150,000 inhabitants, is situated in the southeastern part of The Netherlands near the German border. Ever since the beginning of this century, a great many dialect features, both words and structural properties, have been disappearing and, in general, the dialect of this town is marked by a strong social stigma (Van Hout 1980b, Van Hout & Scheepers 1981). This kind of development is in line with the processes of decay going on in many dialects in Western Europe, in particular in city dialects. Nevertheless, the dialect system and the status of the dialect of Nijmegen are affected in a way which is more drastic than could be expected on the basis of developments in other city dialects in the eastern part of The Netherlands. In our sample (n=143; see section 2), only 27% of the informants said to be speakers of the local dialect, although the sample consisted of people who were born and raised in Nijmegen. On the question as to what kind of people speak the Nijmegen dialect, 82% of the informants gave an answer which clearly betrayed lower social class. The question now arises as to

130

R.vanHout

which factors could account for this strong social categorization of dialect speakers. First of all, one could refer to the general processes of urbanisation and the increase in educational level which are pushing the standard language onwards at the expense of the local dialect. However, in the relationship between the standard language and the local dialect two additional factors have to be taken into account in Nijmegen and both are related to the migration of groups. Migration factors turn out to be of crucial importance in situations of language divergence and language change. Labov (1980) concluded on the basis of neighbourhood studies in Philadelphia and New York that it is the entry of new ethnic and racial groups into a community that provides the driving force behind language diversification. By external immigration, a large number of people, especially during the period 1890-1910, moved into the town of Nijmegen. The immigrants came from other parts of the country, but for the most part they came from the surroundings of Nijmegen. On the other hand, Nijmegen has always had considerable attractions as a residential town, so that also upper middle class and upper class people immigrated. The mixture of various dialect backgrounds together with the standard language pressure exerted by higher social classes may have had a negative impact on the position of the local dialect. Of great importance, however, was that the external migration was parallelled by internal migration. At the beginning of this century, the 'Benedenstad' lost its position as city centre. This quarter, consisting of a maze of small alleys and streets, rapidly fell into decay. People belonging to the middle and upper classes moved from this area to newly built areas. Between the two World Wars it deteriorated to a slum where the people formed a closed community and where the local dialect was the medium of communication. The association of the Nijmegen dialect with this deprived area caused the former to be strongly stigmatized. After the Second World War the community disintegrated because of ongoing depopulation and the politics of demolition with respect to the tumble-down houses in that area. The closed community where the dialect was spoken disappeared, but the dialect itself kept its stigma. In doing sociolinguistic research one should not only gain insight into the social processes behind language variation but also and at the same time into the linguistic forces which govern processes of language change and variation. It is even a prerequisite for getting insight into the exact social forces influencing the language behaviour of social groups that one traces the linguistic contribution to the intertwining of social and linguistic factors. In this study, the emphasis will be on the linguistic side of language variation in that the linguistic factors determining the variation patterns in t / d deletion are analysed.

Determining the Explanatory Factors

131

With respect to t/d deletion, Nijmegen is situated just outside a dialectgeographical area where this deletion process operates very frequently and intensively (Goeman & Van Reenen 1985, Van Hout 1980a). Nevertheless this deletion phenomenon is present in the dialect of Nijmegen, though in a clearly mitigated form. It has been selected as a linguistic variable in the sociolinguistic survey of Nijmegen because of its promising linguistic aspects. The data which will be analysed here come from reading aloud a word list, representing the formal end of the style continuum. 1 The word list was part of the sociolinguistic interview, in which 143 informants participated. Three points emerging from the analysis should receive special emphasis: 1. It turns out that reading aloud a word list may yield remarkably regular and systematic results. It is self-evident that the amount of linguistic variation is severely reduced compared with the amount of variation in spontaneous speech. However, within this reduced spectrum of linguistic variation, the significant linguistic factors can be observed and researched in a microscopically precise way. 2. It is common practice to score t / d deletion by a two-valued scale: 1) the final t/d is present; 2) the final t / d is not present or audible. As for the Nijmegen data, a third, intermediary value is distinguished: a reduced, weak realization of the final t/d. The application of such an extended range of possible scores can produce evidence in favour of the idea that the deletion process in the Nijmegen dialect area is a gradual reduction process governed by phonetic/phonological parameters. 3. Empirical research is pre-eminently valuable if the empirical findings are confronted with sharp hypotheses deduced from a consistent theory on the phenomena investigated. Such an approach occurs rather infrequently in sociolinguistic research. The research practice seems to be too strongly data-driven and a severe point of criticism to be made is a lack of concern for theory and theory building. However, as for t/d deletion it appears possible to confront the Nijmegen data with recent insights from phonology and, more particularly, from non-linear phonology (Kahn 1976). It will be shown that the concepts of sonority and syllabification provide a solid theoretical basis for the explanation of the empirical variation data on t/d deletion.

1. LINGUISTIC PARAMETERS IN AMERICAN AND DUTCH STUDIES

Surveys of the studies carried out in the United States (Guy 1980, Neu 1980) bring up three strong and generally operative linguistic factors or parameters influencing the deletion of the final t/d:

132

1. 2. 3.

R.vanHout

the suffix status of the final t/d; the nature of the following segment; the nature of the preceding consonant.

The suffix status of the final stop and the nature of the following segment are the clearest and the strongest factors. If the final stop is a suffix (past tense, past participle), deletion is more prohibited; as for the following segment, a following obstruent is the most favourable context for deletion, followed by liquids, glides and, finally, vowels.2 As for the preceding consonant, the results are fairly inconsistent. The fricatives, with the exception of / s / , seem to constitute the most unfavourable deletion condition, together with the laterals. The Dutch results reveal a rank order different from the one found in American English. It is the preceding consonant which arises as the most influencing deletion parameter. A strong opposition between preceding obstruent and sonorant consonants is found: fricatives and plosives stimulate deletion; nasals, glides and liquids prohibit deletion (e.g. De Vries et al. 1974, Schouten 1982). In addition, it is remarkable that both De Vries et al. (1974) and Schouten (1982) conclude, given their results, that the suffix t/d is more often deleted than its non- morphematic counterpart. Two factors put forward in studies on American English, which obviously operate at a secondary level, should be mentioned here. First, the absence of word accent appears to create a favourable condition for the deletion process. The second factor relates to the articulation position of the preceding and following segment. Fasold (1972) found that an identical (= homorganic) articulation position (e.g. both segments are labial, dental or velar) constitutes a deletion promoting environment. Unfortunately, the hard empirical findings in these studies invite some criticism. The validity of many conclusive statements in the literature severely suffers from the fact that the type of analysis applied is inadequate and, secondly, from the fact that the number of observations compared to the many combinations of the different values of the factors studied is too small to say anything conclusive about the independent influence of the factors.

2. THE NIJMEGEN DATA

In order to illuminate the Nijmegen data, something should be said about the alveolar final stop in Netherlandic. First of all, the final stop, provided it is realized, is always voiceless because of a devoicing rule operating at word (morpheme) boundaries. 3 Furthermore, the alveolar final stop

Determining the Explanatory Factors

133

marks different morphological functions: 1. second and third person singular present tense ; 2. past participle. However, the past participle is in most cases also marked by a second affix, viz. the prefix ge-. One of the three factors that are varied systematically in the word list concerns the suffix status of the final t/d. This factor is restricted to past participles. So, the word list does not contain present tense forms while such forms cannot be investigated adequately in a list with separate, unconnected words. The two other linguistic factors varied systematically are: the word final syllable carries or does not carry word accent; the preceding consonant may belong to four different consonant categories: liquids, nasals, plosives, spirants. The random sample of informants contains 143 persons, stratified along level of occupation (three levels), age (three age groups) and sex (only stratified in the youngest age group). Only the realizations of words which were read aloud free from error, in an acceptable manner, have been incorporated in the calculations.

3. A FIRST ANALYSIS

An overview of the first results for the factors of suffix status and the nature of the preceding consonant is given in table 1. The total number of deletions is 511; this means that the deletion percentage is only 4.2%. The mean number of deletions per informant is 3.65 (n=140). Unfortunately, the distribution of the number of deletions is rather skewed; 54 informants ( = 42.1%) never delete a final t/d. In addition to the deletion score, a reduction score is calculated, in which an intermediate realization value of the final t/d is taken into account. The distribution scores of the informants on this more gradual scale turns out to be much more symmetrical. Nevertheless, the correlation between the reduction and deletion score is fairly high: r=.85. This outcome obviously indicates that the deletion process in Nijmegen is in fact a phonetically gradual process. Supporting evidence is produced by the significant correlation between the reduction score and reading tempo or reading speed, which is -.54 (reading tempo is measured in number of seconds used by an informant to read the word list). The correlation between the deletion score and reading tempo is clearly less but it is still significant (r=-.25). If the reduction scores of the informants are corrected for reading tempo, the sharpest picture of the social stratification of this linguistic variable emerges. The main results are (they will not be discussed any further):

134 R. van Hout

preceding consonant liquids

- suffix past participle 1 r

nasals

plosives

η of words deletion 20/1120 m η of words deletion 38/281

η

Ρ k

fricatives

η of words deletion 16/1119 η of words deletion 2/1118

f s g

η of words deletion 35/555 η of words deletion 40/561 η of words deletion 23/562 η of words deletion 56/561 η of words deletion 79/1120

—

= =

=

= —

—

—

—

—

—

= = —

=

=

8 1.43% 8 0.18%

+ suffix past participle η of deletion η of deletion

words 4/559 words 0/561

8 1.79% 2 13.52%

η of words deletion 5/561 η of words deletion 18/561

4 6.31% 4 7.13%

η of words deletion 26/559 η of words deletion 28/561

4 4.09% 4 9.98% 8 7.05 %

η of words deletion 27/560 η of words deletion 62/561 η of words deletion 34/559

=

= = = —

= =

= = —

—

—

= —

= —

=

4 0.72% 8 0.00% 4 0.89% 4 3.21% 4 4.65% 4 4.99% 4 4.82% 4 11.05% 4 6.08%

Table 1: First results on final t / d deletion, split up into the categories of suffix status and the nature of the preceding consonant

older informants show more reduction (age effect); informants from a lower occupational level show more reduction (effect of occupational level); no sex effect emerges (in the youngest age group). Given the deletion scores in table 1, something more can be said about the two intra-linguistic factors involved. As for the suffix status of the final t/d, no systematic differences seem to exist between the past participles and the word forms which carry no suffix. The nature of the preceding consonant shows clear differences. The fricatives and the plosives are marked by a generally high level of deletion. No important difference in deletion seems to exist between the plosives and the fricatives; the mean number of deletions per word for the plosives is 8.06, whereas the mean number of deletions for the fricatives is 10.04. Both the liquids and the nasals turn out to be heterogeneous groups of consonants. After / r / , hardly any deletion is found; the deletion process after / l / is obviously stronger. After / m / the deletion process appears to be more intensive than after /n/.

Determining the Explanatory Factors

135

The question now is how the analysis of the intra-linguistic factors can be brought beyond the level of simply describing some conspicuous differences. The procedure generally applied in language variation studies is to add together all observations of all informants and to divide, subsequently, the set of observations into possibly relevant linguistic categories. In fact, this is what is being done in table 1; a next step in the analysis could be the introduction of other intra-linguistic factors. The cost of such a procedure is the loss of informant characteristics. The observations gathered at the informant level are aggregated and the data to be analysed are brought onto a higher aggregation level. The procedure, however, is not without pitfalls, especially if the number of observations per informant varies considerably as is often the case in studying spontaneous speech. In case of a word list, the invaluable advantage is that every informant performs the same task. If it is assumed that the conditions for the informants are equal and if it is assumed that the informants are homogeneous with respect to the conditions, it is allowed to compute for every word (there are 90 words) a deletion score and a reduction score, simply by summing up the scores of all informants for the word in question. In the analyses which are presented below, all words with / r / as the preceding consonant are excluded, because hardly any deletion occurs in this position. In addition, one word is skipped because its final t was followed by a word with an initial / d / . So, the deletion and the reduction scores of 73 words remain for further analysis. For the final t/d in each of the remaining words, the value of five intralinguistic factors or parameters can be determined. The five factors can be found in table 2. The choice of the five factors is self-evident given the literature on t/d deletion, although one may wonder whether the classification used for the factor of the following context is the optimal one. Anyway, it is the classification which is usually applied. This factor causes an extra problem in the Nijmegen data. The six classes are far from being optimally distributed, because of the fact that this factor is not sufficiently dealt with in the construction of the word list. It was expected that the following context was not a very influential one given former Dutch results and given the task of reading aloud a list of separate words.4 The data constructed can be analysed by multiple regression, in which the deletion score or the reduction score is the dependent variable and in which the five factors from table 2 are the independent or predicting variables. By multiple regression it is possible to trace which factors influence the process of deletion and the extent to which these factors can predict or explain the amount of deletion and the amount of reduction found. Some technical notes have to be made. The predicting variables

136 R. van Hout

1.

suffix status

2.

word accent final syllable

3.

preceding consonant

4.

following context

5.

homorganicness

1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 1. 2.

no suffix suffix past participle + word accent - word accent liquid A/ nasal / n / nasal / m / plosives / p / / k / fricatives / f / / s / / g / pause vowel or semi-vowel liquid nasal plosive fricative + homorganic - homorganic

Table 2: Five intra-linguistic factors to be investigated regarding the deletion and reduction score of word final t/d

are nominal ones and, consequently, dummy coding was applied, which means that the influence of every category within a factor (a set of categories) is measured in relation to the influence of the remaining categories within that factor. Further on, stepwise multiple regression was applied, which means that the analysis looks for an optimal (sub)set of factors (or categories within factors) which can predict the dependent variable. The stop criterium for taking in new predicting variables was a p-value of .05 of the partial correlation coefficients. The most important results of the multiple regression on the reduction and the deletion score are summarized in table 3. Both multiple regression coefficients are fairly high, which means that an acceptable level of predictive power is yielded by the predicting intra-linguistic variables. The multiple correlation of the reduction score is the more successful. The four variables that took part in the composition of the multiple correlation of the reduction score are listed according to their rank order in table 3. The first and strongest variable is a preceding fricative, which is a member of the categories of the third intra-linguistic factor (see table 2). The ' + ' behind this variable means that a preceding fricative is a reduction promoting environment. The factor second in rank is word accent; the presence of word accent on the final syllable is a reduction prohibiting factor. Both the third and fourth variables belong to the factor of the following context.

Determining the Explanatory Factors

137

reduction score multiple R = .73 variables selected, rank ordered according to predictive power: 1. preceding fricative 2. word accent 3. following pause 4. following (semi)vowel

(factor (factor (factor (factor

3) 2) 4) 4)

+ -

deletion score multiple R = .62 Table 3: Results of the multiple regression analysis with the five intra-linguistic factors of table 2 as predicting variables

Both environments, prohibiting reduction, are minor variables compared to the first variable. Nevertheless, their influence is significant. The detailed analysis of the deletion score appeared to have a comparable pattern of predicting variables. The strong influence of the preceding consonant corresponds with the results in other studies of Netherlandic mentioned before. Contrary to the findings on American English, the factor of preceding consonant outweighs the factor of the following context in the Dutch findings. Part of this effect could be artificial because of the situation in which the data were gathered: the informants had to read aloud a list of separate words. Contrary to other Dutch results, however, the influence of a preceding plosive is less than the impact of the fricatives in the Nijmegen data when all other intra-linguistic factors are taken into account. So, the former impression of a similar promoting effect of fricatives and plosives on the basis of the raw data (see table 1) is at least partly spurious. Furthermore, two negative conclusions can be drawn. Neither the factor of homorganicness nor the factor of suffix status add a significant contribution to the prediction of the deletion or reduction score, given the variables already selected in the multiple regression analysis. Especially with regard to the suffix status of the final t/d this result is remarkable, for now three different kinds of influence seem to exist: in American English the suffix status is a prohibiting factor; in some Netherlandic language varieties the suffix status is a promoting factor (Schouten 1982, De Vries e.a. 1974); in Nijmegen, no influence of the suffix status seems to exist. When one aims at a cross-linguistic, more general explanation of t/d deletion, one is inclined to consider this process as a universal reduction process operating on the sentence phonological level, based partly on more universal linguistic parameters and partly on language specific parameters. Some supporting evidence is produced by the influence of reading tempo

138 R. van Hout and the word accent in the Nijmegen data. Kiparsky (1972) suggests that reduction processes like t/d deletion are not caused by real grammar rules but by general conditions impinging on speech performance. The idea of a set of universal, natural reduction processes is very attractive of course, especially if it seems possible to give shape to these processes by plugging in language specific parameters. The deletion promoting effect found in some Dutch studies, however, contradicts such a universal regularity. It is hard to see how the presence of an extra morpheme boundary may be a deletion stimulating condition. The contradiction can only be resolved by assuming that the morphological rule of suffix addition is not fully operative. The weakening of this rule could be induced by an intensive mode of operation of t/d reduction on the phonetic level. Whatever may be the case, it is important to note that, on the one hand, a cross-linguistic tendency or regularity seems to be traced; on the other hand, the level of explanation seems rather superficial, for only a simple list of intra-linguistic factors influencing t/d deletion is provided.

4. SONORITY A N D SYLLABIFICATION

An entrance to explaining language variation and language change can be created by the formulation of universal tendencies. An example is the study of Labov, Yaeger and Steiner (1972) who explored tendencies in vowel changes. Chen (1973) introduces the idea of metarules, which govern and constrain language specific rules in their evolution and operation. The type of constraints found on t/d deletion seems to fit an approach through metarulelike statements. However, the studies in which this kind of approach is applied give the impression that their final outcome still is a descriptive list of significant factors (though a fairly interesting list) influencing or guiding language change (cf. Hoppenbrouwers 1982; Labov, Yaeger and Steiner 1972). Another entrance, the one chosen here, can be found in the ideas developed in non-linear phonology. Characteristic of this phonological approach is the role of the syllable and the syllable structure in relation to phonological processes (Kahn 1976, Booij 1981). There are two main principles: every phonological segment is dominated by a syllable and the structuring of the segments into syllables is determined by syllabification rules. One of these rules maximizes the assignment of the final consonants of a preceding syllable to the following syllable. Phonotactic constraints define the permitted combinations of sound segments. It is noteworthy, that at several places in the literature on t/d deletion the deletion prohibiting

Determining the Explanatory Factors

139

role of a following vowel is ascribed to the fact that the final t/d can be reallocated to the following syllable (for instance Guy, 1980:9). This approach can be worked out with the analysis of the Netherlandic syllable structure advocated by Van der Hulst (1984). He claims that the linear structure of the syllable should be described in terms of an absolute sonority scale or sonority hierarchy. The developments in modern phonology have brought about a revaluation of the concept of sonority, which is marked by a very long linguistic tradition. This concept is discussed amply for instance in one of the oldest Netherlandic grammars, 'De Spreeckkonst' by Petrus Montanus, published in 1635 (Chapter XV, see Wirth-Van Wijk 1980: 119-24). His classification of degrees of sonority shows a striking resemblance with the 'modern' sonority hierarchies (e.g. Hooper 1974). The use of the qualifier 'absolute' for a sonority scale by Van der Hulst (1984) means that the feature sonority is multi-valued and gradual. On the basis of sound sequences permitted in syllables in Netherlandic Van der Hulst (1984: 99) postulates the gradual sonority scale for Netherlandic presented in table 4. obs m /__..—/ 1

2

/

η

1 /

r /

2.25 2.50 2.75

gli vow /—.._/ 3

4

Table 4: Absolute sonority scale for Netherlandic; Van der Hulst (1984:93)

Van der Hulst (1984) argues that neighbouring sound segments in Netherlandic should have some minimal distance in sonority value. The question now is, how the ideas of distance between neighbouring segments, absolute sonority scales and syllabification patterns can be exploited to gain some explanatory power for the Nijmegen data on t/d deletion. The (absolute) sonority scale can be used to determine the distance between the word final t/d and the sound segment on its left side and the distance between the word final t/d and the sound segment on its right side. The amount of distance within this triple of sound segments can be translated into two implications: 1. The position of the word final t/d will become weaker or more unstable the smaller the dissimilarity or distance in sonority vis-ä-vis the preceding consonant. Assuming the sonority scale in table 4, the position of the word final t/d is fairly strong after nasals and liquids (and of course after glides and vowels); its position is in danger after obstruents (fricatives and plosives) and the probability of deletion or reduction increases.

140 R. van Hout 2. The position of the word final t/d is determined also by the 'pull capacity' of the following syllable, which may attract the preceding t/d and make this sound segment part of its onset. The pulling force will increase with the distance in sonority between the word final t / d and the following sound segment. The tendency towards deletion or reduction will be stimulated by segments with a low sonority value (again the obstruents); it will be prohibited by segments with a high sonority value. The sonority values of the preceding consonant and the following context can be incorporated as variables in a stepwise multiple regression analysis. In addition, exact values could be used, for instance the ones proposed by Van der Hulst (1984). The distribution of the different possible values in sonority for the following context is far from systematic enough to apply such a detailed scale value assignment to the data from the word list. It is to be preferred to construct only a dichotomy between values in the upper part of the scale (liquids, glides, vowels; also a pause is included) and values in the lower part of the scale (nasals, fricatives, plosives). An absolute value assignment (at least of interval level) can be applied to the sonority of the preceding consonant. It is possible to use the values proposed by Van der Hulst (1984); it turned out however that the values given in table 5 resulted in a better multiple correlation in the regression analysis.

1.

sonority preceding consonant

2. 3.

sonority following segment word accent final syllable

4.

preceding / s /

5.

following / s /

1. 2. 3. 4. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 1. 2.

/I/ /n/ /m/ fricative or plosive liquid, (semi)vowel, pause nasal, fricative, plosive + word accent - word accent - /s/ + /s/ - /s/ + /s/

Table 5: Five intra-linguistic factors used in the second multiple regression analysis on the deletion and reduction scores of word final t / d

In comparison with the first multiple regression analysis, two factors have disappeared (see table 2). It turned out that neither of these factors, suffix status of the word final t/d and homorganicness, made a meaningful

141

Determining the Explanatory Factors

contribution in the regression analysis. In turn, two factors are added to the list of intralinguistic factors, both giving a special status to the fricative / s / . The introduction of these two factors can be grounded on the role of dissimilarity conditions. A preceding or following / s / (or / z / ) results in an even stronger similarity, viz. with respect to the point of articulation. Both / s / (/z/) and / t / ( / d / ) have an alveolar point of articulation; it is quite imaginable that this condition destabilizes the position of the final t/d. In fact, the same idea is embodied by the former factor of homorganicness. Guy (1980) prefers to define this factor as the articulatory complexity of the cluster. He defines the complexity as the number of changes in the place of articulation a cluster of consonants requires, but he adds that this factor certainly is a very low-level constraint. Jansen (1981) who studied t/d deletion in the Amsterdam vernacular, observed that a preceding / s / causes an extra high percentage of deletion. He objects to the factor of homorganicness, claiming that this factor should also bring about a surplus of deletion after / n / and / l / . The Amsterdam data do not bear out that prediction. By introducing a preceding and following / s / (/z/) as separate factors in the regression analysis, it is hypothesized that the resemblance in articulation only acts as a special condition if the consonants involved have the same sonority level. All five factors are ordered in such a way, that the lower values are deletion prohibiting conditions. Consequently, a positive correlation (οτβcoefficient) means that the conditions of the factor involved run from deletion prohibiting to deletion stimulating ones. The results of the multiple regression on this new set of intra-linguistic factors in relation to the deletion and the reduction score can be found in table 6.

factor sonority preceding consonant sonority following segment word accent preceding / s / following / s /

deletion r

score ß

.478 .136 .261 .491 .159

.433 .150 .295 .384 .151

Multiple R = .722

reduction r .360 .240 .398 .576 .345

score ß .321 .210 .383 .519 .309

Multiple R = .837

Table 6: Correlations and ß-coefficients of the second set of intra-linguistic factors

First of all, the predictive power has increased. The multiple correlation for the deletion score was .62; it is now .72. The multiple correlation of the reduction score increases from .72 to .84, which means an increase

142 R. van Hout in explained variance of 19%. Especially the multiple correlation of the reduction score is quite high. The analysis of the new set of intra-linguistic factors is not only more successful in this respect. In the analysis of the reduction score, all factors prove to make a significant contribution to the prediction of the amount of reduction. As for the deletion score, both factors related to the following segment (factor 2 and 5) do not have a significant ^-coefficient. This result corroborates the former conclusion that in the Nijmegen data the role of the preceding segment outweighs the role of the following segment. The general conclusion should be that the success of the new analysis confirms the role of sonority, dissimilarity conditions and syllabification patterns.

5. DISCUSSION

One could imagine that another multiple regression analysis with other intra-linguistic factors could give an even better result than the final multiple regression presented above. However, many other analyses have been tried out and none of them showed improvement. In addition, the final multiple regression analysis presented above is quite satisfactory with respect to some more technical, but essential features. The values chosen for the sonority scale of the preceding consonant look fairly optimal in the sense that the resulting pattern is linear (which does not preclude that the values of Van der Hulst (1984) are the basic sonority values; they could be related to the values in our analysis by means of a mathematical function). Furthermore, the residual scores have a normal distribution pattern, whereas the so-called outliers do not show a systematic bias in their distribution. These outcomes support the success of the analysis and it must be concluded that this confrontation of sociolinguistic empirical data with hypotheses or lines of reasoning derived from recent developments in phonological theory proved to be fruitful. The fact that the analysis of the t/d reduction score consistently gives a better result than the analysis of the t/d deletion score, whereas there is at the same time a high correlation between both scores, points to an underlying phonetic gradual rule. The very regular results of the word list do not necessarily lead to a comparable regularity in data from spontaneous speech. In spontaneous data of Netherlandic varieties special attention should be given to finite verb forms ending in a consonant cluster with a final t/d (a special category is formed by verb roots ending in a consonant cluster with a final t/d (e.g. 'vinden' (= to find, think), 'worden' (= to become, be)); a second special category is formed by the irregular

Determining the Explanatory

Factors

143

past tense forms ending in a consonant cluster with a final t / d (e.g. 'moest' < 'moeten' ( = must), 'wist' < 'weten' ( = to know)). One should take into account the very possibility that, in addition to the general operative phonetic reduction rule, other forces could influence the reduction and deletion of the final t/d, such as morphologically based rules and variability in lexical input. One of the errors committed in the recent past has been that attempts were made to reduce the data on t/d deletion and reduction within the frame of only one linguistic rule. However, the simultaneous operation of different rules aggravates the analytic work considerably. The striking regularity in the Nijmegen data from the word list is probably also due to the incipient stage of the reduction/deletion process. Nijmegen is adjacent to a dialect-geographical area where the deletion process operates in a much stronger and more intensive way. It could be typical of this intensive mode of operation that the deletion/reduction process is accompanied by the intervention of morphological and lexical properties and regularities.

NOTES 1. An analysis of part of the data from spontaneous speech can be found in Van Hout (1981). 2. However, a following pause may have an opposite kind of influence, depending on the dialect (Labov 1975, section 3.1). 3. In the analysis of the t / d deletion in the Nijmegen data the intra-Iinguistic factor of an underlying / t / or / d / was also analysed; no significant differences were found. 4. The pause as following context is occurring because the words were typed on four different sheets. Going from one sheet to another causes a break between the words to be read.

REFERENCES Booij, G. (1981) Generatieve fonologie van het Nederlands, Het Spectrum, Utrecht/ Amsterdam. De Vries, J. et al. (1974) De slot-t in consonantclusters te Leiden; een sociolinguistisch onderzoek, Forum der Letteren 15, 235-249. Fasold, R. (1972) Tense marking in Black English; a linguistic and social analysis, Center for Applied Linguistics, Washington. Goeman, A. & P. van Reenen (1985) Word-final t-deletion in Dutch dialects: the roles of conceptual prominence, articulatory complexity, paradigmatic properties, token frequency and geographical distribution, Vrije Universiteit Working Papers in Linguistics, Amsterdam. Guy, G. (1980) Variation in the group and the individual: the case of final stop deletion, in: Labov (ed.) (1980), 1-36. Hooper, J. (1976) An introduction to natural generative phonology, Academic Press, New York.

144

R. van Hout

Hoppenbrouwers, C. (1982) Language change; a study of phonemic and analogical change with particular reference to S.E. Dutch dialects, Dissertation R.U. Groningen. Jansen, F. (1981) Onderzoek op het Amsterdamse spreektaalkorpus. Deelrapport 2, P.J. Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam. Kahn, D. (1976) Syllable-based generalizations in English phonology, Indiana University Linguistics Club, Dissertation MIT, Bloomington. Kiparsky, P. (1972) Explanation in phonology, in: S. Peters (ed.), Goals of linguistic theory, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 189-227. Labov, W. (1975) What is a linguistic fact? De Ridder Press, Lisse. Labov, W. (ed.) (1980) Locating language in time and space, Academic Press, New York. Labov, W. (1980) The social origins of sound change, in: Labov (ed.) (1980), 251-265. Labov, W., M. Yaeger & R. Steiner (1972) A quantitative study of sound change in progress, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. Neu, Η. (1980) Ranking constraints on / t , d / deletion in American English, in: Labov (ed.) (1980), 37-54. Schouten, M. (1982) T-deletie in de stad Utrecht: schoolkinderen en grootouders, Forum der Letteren 23, 289-291. Van der Hulst, Η. (1984) Syllable structure and stress in Dutch, Foris Publications, Dordrecht. Van Hout, R. (1980a) Is een mathematisch-statistische dialectgeografie mogelijk? in: J. Kruijsen (ed.), Liber Amicorum Weijnen, Van Gorcum, 146-158, Assen. Van Hout, R. (1980b) De Studie van stadsdialect: van dialectologie, empirische linguistiek en sociolinguistiek, Toegepaste Taalkunde in Artikelen 8, 143-162. Van Hout, R. (1981) Word final t / d deletion in a Dutch urban dialect and some problems in variable rule analysis, in: S. Daalder & M. Gerritsen (eds.), Linguistics in The Netherlands 1981, North-Holland Publishing Company, Amsterdam/Oxford/New York, 23-35. Van Hout, R. & W. Scheepers (1981) Een paradox in het sociolinguistisch onderzoek: autochtonie vs. migratie, Mededelingen van de Nijmeegse Centrale voor Dialect- en Naamkunde 18, 33-73. Wirth-van Wijk, L. (1980) Uit en rondom de Spreeckkonst van Petrus Montanus, Van Gorcum, Assen.

Directness, Explicitness and Orientation in Turkish Family Interaction Erica Huls

I. THE CONTEXT OF THE STUDY

This article is concerned with directness, explicitness and orientation as found in a Turkish family that has migrated to The Netherlands. The notions 'directness', 'explicitness' and 'orientation' are derived from classical literature on socialization in the family and social inequality (e.g. Bernstein 1973; Hess & Shipman 1967; Gecas 1979). These terms are used to describe the family's socialization patterns which in some cases fit in more with the main pattern found in school and society than in other cases. The operationalization of these notions is not always uniform and unequivocal. In the present study, the operationalization is based upon insights from pragmatics (see Levinson (1983) for an introduction into this field). We use these notions without specifying, in advance, firm hypotheses with respect to their distribution in Turkish families. The notions 'directness', 'explicitness' and 'orientation' are investigated on the basis of one specific speech act, namely the directive. A directive can be defined here as an effort to steer the nonverbal behaviour of the addressee (Ervin-Tripp 1976). This effort may incorporate various degrees of power (from strong to weak) and may vary, for example, from invite to suggest, from urge to dissuade and from order to forbid. On the basis of theoretical work done by Searle (1975, 1976, 1977) one can distinguish the following aspects in the speech act 'directive': 1. an illocutionary aspect: its function as a directive speech act, in contrast to, e.g., a representative or expressive function; 2. a propositional content: an agent (i.e. the addressee) performing an act. In giving directives one selects a specific formulation from an entire range. One can, for example, select one of the so-called direct formulations, i.e. those formulations in which both the illocutionary aspect and the propositional content are expressed. The imperative Close the door and the explicit performative I request you to close the door meet these criteria, thus they count as relatively direct. A directive is embedded in a complex of conditions, reasons, motives, social factors and circumstances: the 'domain of relevance' (Garvey 1975). It consists of factors such as:

146 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

E.Huls

the directive is reasonable; the speaker wants the addressee to perform the act; the addressee is willing to perform the act; the addressee is able to perform the act; the addressee is obliged to perform the act; the addressee is an appropriate recipient of the directive; the addressee has rights that may conflict with the performance of the act; 8. before the directive, the addressee did not intend to perform the act. On the basis of these factors, one can interpret utterances as directives when, at first glance, they seem to be something different. The fact is that the expression of one of these factors can serve as a directive. Thus, a statement concerning the wishes of the speaker - I want you to close the door - or a question concerning the abilities of the addressee - Can you close the door? - can function as a directive. In these examples, the agent you and the intended act to close the door are mentioned and, in this respect, they are direct. They are indirect, however, because of the fact that the directive illocutionary force is not put into words. The statement of a reason such as There is a draft here can also function as a directive for the intended act. This is a so-called real indirect directive: neither the intended act, nor the agent, nor the directive illocutionary force are selected to be put into words. We describe the formulations for directives in Turkish family interaction in the light of the question: which aspect(s) of the speech act directive and/or its domain of relevance is (are) selected to be put into words? Is the act mentioned? What about the person acting? The rights and duties? The wish of the speaker? The utility of the act? Depending upon the aspects thus selected, formulations are interpreted as differing in degree of directness and explicitness, and as an expression of a specific orientation. The precise arrangement of the various formulations under these more general headings can be found in section 3. The aim of this study is to explore the range of variation in directive styles that exist in The Netherlands. In doing this, notions that play a role in discussions about potential causes and backgrounds of social inequality are employed. In our previous research (Huls 1982) two types of variation were described: a comparison was made of the styles in a factory director's and a janitor's family. In the present study we intend to trace whether a different range of options shows up in a rather casually selected, Turkish migrant family. The comparison between the directive repertoire in the Turkish family and the repertoires in the Dutch families is based upon the assumption that pragmalinguistic analyses of the directive speech act (e.g. Garvey's (1975) theory of meaning factors in the domain of relevance and Searle's

Directness, Explicitness and Orientation

147

(1975) specification of felicity conditions) 1 are valid, irrespective of specific languages. Thus, we compare families on the level of their use of abstract, conceptual categories (e.g. ability condition, imperative), and not on the level of specific language surface forms. The assumption stated above seems reasonable, and much research has recently been carried out in which this line of thought is followed either implicitly or explicitly (Brown & Levinson 1978; Hollos & Beeman 1978; House & Kasper 1981; Hill et al. 1986). The practical relevance of the study can be stated as follows: perhaps the communicative habits with which Turkish pre-school children grow up differ from the style that Dutch children are accustomed to. In situations of inter-ethnic contact where Turks are in a minority position, this difference may be the source of unwanted phenomena such as irritation, misunderstanding, and dislike (Gumperz 1982). In school it can lead to problems for Turkish children in terms of linking up with school culture.

2. DATA COLLECTION

The investigation was designed as a case study. This method is frequently utilized in research concerning language use and language acquisition (e.g. Ervin-Tripp & Mitchell-Kernan 1977; Ochs & Schieffelin 1979). The analysis of interactional variables is agreed upon as necessary, albeit time-consuming. A case study has certain advantages, e.g. one can study different settings, one can study a child embedded in his or her social group, and one can try to gain insight into the social context of the language material. The main disadvantage, however, is that only cases are studied. Results cannot be generalized to broader categories of children. This, however, is not the aim of the study. As stated above, the study aims at a better understanding of the possible variation in communication habits with which pre-school children grow up. The children are chosen from a certain social background for heuristic reasons; not to permit generalization to a sociological category. The Turkish family that participated in the study comes from an Anatolian village. It consists of the father (a recently unemployed factory labourer, duration of residence in The Netherlands = 14 years), the mother (duration of residence in The Netherlands = 5 years), and four children (a 16-year-old daughter, a 13-year-old son, an 11-year-old daughter and a 6-year-old son). The background of the family can be roughly sketched along the following lines. The mother married when she was 16 years old. A daughter was born. The father left home to become an immigrant worker in The Netherlands. He spent his holidays in Turkey. After nine years the mother

148

Ε. Huls

and children moved to The Netherlands. The family was united in a three room apartment located in a suburb with mixed population in a mediumsized Dutch city. With respect to origin, number of children, and duration of residence, the family is an example of the most common type of family in the sample of Ri§vanoglu, Priester & Brouwer (1983). The family maintains few contacts with Dutch people and Dutch institutions, the division of tasks between the parents seems to be rather traditional and the family is religious in the sense that it keeps ramazan and the father visits the mosque. The material was collected via participant observation. I remained with this family for a period of seven weeks, from 3:30 p.m. until at least 8:00 or 9:00 p.m. daily. I assisted with household tasks. After a period of mutual habituation, recordings were made of the interaction within the family. Some tapes were recorded by the mother while I was not present. A selection of approximately five hours of family interaction forms the empirical basis of the analysis that is reported here. By far the largest part of the collected material is spoken in Turkish. As a first step in gaining access to the material I started following a course in Turkish. The tapes were transcribed by a native Turkish person. A so-called 'Netherlandic sub-script', a meaning notation that leaves the original structure of the spoken language intact, was added by someone proficient in both Turkish and Netherlandic. This sub-script has given me a helping hand in gaining access to the Turkish text. Examples of this procedure can be found in table 1. The means of gaining access to the material is dealt with in more detail in Huls & Van de Mond (1987). Lewis (1984) and Redhouse (1983, 1984) are used as written sources with respect to the Turkish language. The directive repertoire in the Turkish family is compared with the directive repertoire of our two Dutch families (as analysed in Huls 1982). These families also had a five or six-year-old child. They differed with respect to social class: as was mentioned before in one family the father was a janitor, in the other he was a factory director.

3. DATA ANALYSIS

In accordance with pragmalinguistic research by Searle (1975), Ervin-Tripp (1976) and Garvey (1975), a typology of directives has been developed (see table 1). For the Turkish part we could utilize the work of Aksu (1973, 1974). We also made use of fragments of the interaction in the family itself and of the intuitions of the Turkish co-worker Söylemez and the Turkologist Zürcher.

Directness, Explicitness and Orientation

1 4 9

Ι I

i

&

8,

"si •>—

» t

ΐ

5

4) -Η Μ OJ -Ρ β Ο « Ή

•

^ 8 , 1 ο β -Η 8 5 3 Ό * υ •u - 3 α Ο,

?

!

ί

, S C c ο 0 0 * Η Μ ΚΛ Ό φ 5 "w Ό Ο " C C 4J C 4 « U« «Η

i s s

Μ V ί ΐ

8 -Η «

I U I *» « u Χ 4> κ ® « * σ - 5 Λ

1 1

Ό

Ή

S

ο

filTä." I I

-u

3 &ιΗ UΌ

I s

S

·

Φ > 3 •Η C

9 5 ® *J δ > — ~ Μ +5 ä Ο β Ή c U h 3

mil Λ

s . β Ό

£

Η .

& »&ι \ β

£ i 4> Ο Μ -Η =ο υ

ο.

5 8 41 Ο »< »H -ο ü

1 •V. φ

it 3

3

:

a

3»T ι Μ

«

8 I

I

3,7

• s i

1 1

8 S

q

ο

a s

G

• a G «

1«

ft « 0 •o 73

3.7

a ?

1 1

1 1

•

tl CQ 3

«!"? > Φ

7« •ι W > Ο I ?

Η ^ Λ

°· 1 1

!

s i

3

ί

s !

I

ι $

·

ί

5

5

Ι 5 5 3 Β rt > W Λ Ή Ο « υ

φ

Μ

S - 5 5 G

I Q £

Ä I 1 Μ

1

a

C Ο Φ Φ CT : ή ή c c c < ο ο ο ο

9

• 5 ί ι Φ «

t

* α C Μ «Η «Μ C Φ Μ C Ο β Ä

Ο

. *i

8 , 5 * Β { Ο $ 8

£

i»

ί -ss β r U Μ Φ

X c

Λ *i

«

M i Μ C ·

£ :

Ε. Hüls

Η Μ

S-Ä ^ Φ * A·

N Ό

δ

Φ I

Ö Φ

Α

Ν

Β Α»

-ι 5 ί §5

I - A

* Ϋ C Χ Ο

§ C Η Ο

0> ΙΗ

Λ

Μ

« « « · Η C 3 C

±J Λ -Η 41 4 J M 4 J C 4 J W I ΐ Φ FFL ΟΙ Ό 3 Φ Η W Ό Ο

U 4

4J ( Γ Ό U C C Β -Η Ι

C ·

Β

§ Ü

-ΗΚ

Ν Ü

T

4J

*» α -Η Ο

V

Ο

3

-Ρ

Ä

®

—

g a l HI

3.3 s IV

ϊ

i

s 3 Ό Φ

I 4) «

•υ •1 Ρ

» 0

i ? £ s ar

I I

Λ. C '8 ·«-( Β

I I

Η •

Ν

Η 1 1

Β 7 3 i a s «Η

•-ο ιΛ ι ι Μ ο, ο a s

4 Μ I I

I I D> 0 c u *J φ " Ι Μ Φ 0) Μ i § V Μ -Η Ό «Μ V β Ό 5 s

β

Φ

Φ > ΐί C 3

?OT

η ο. u

Μ Ο Α

S I Φ

ι ι

Η ^ 3» I 1 KL & Γ

ι ι

υ φ

Φ

V)

!

1

I i

•Η

Ρ* Ή η Μ

U

5 ϊ

§ Ε α> t> υ « 0 υ ~ 'S *J Μ Ο 95 •Η c c β ο Φ »Ή •d « 4J 01 3 Ό

*

C "Ο >» I η) t 4J S i« •Ρ "β Ü « Χ} -Η 1 Β 1 ! Ν 4ίΗ -> 2Ο • >1 Α οι «Μ V Φ V £ SS

m

C• » •Η

Ν -Η

Ν

*i •Η ä 8

+

§L 3T § O

?

ü s u 0 Μ Ή υ 1 3ι I ι Μ

υ

β

f». 3 S, I ^

δ ι

kΙ

C Η Η ? stem

150

5Ü % Ν υ ο Ο 'S Η G Ρ» ?|ίΐ ^ Φ

Φ +>

(0 Λ·

a i

Φ Δ

Φ

ο » Ρ C β vi Ο Ü ο φ U αα . £ Φ υ Κ 4J Μ Φ β 9 · α « ϊ « r χ φ φ ** ό α 4J

> Φ β υ

ΐ*

•ι φ -ι Α -Η 4J Λ b) ν

C

«J

«β *J c Λ1 Ο υ

ο 4-· "Ο φ

—

ζ*

« 3 ο 2

^

ο;

a

ΐ

β> a» •3?

e

Λ

i

β & ··» ι ?

§

ό

η

3 S

9)

9ι

SS

η

S.

8

«

ι

8

8

S3

Λ. Λ. Ή Λ.

a

aas 5 Η

ϊ

5 8

I

Μ Ο **ν, β ä c β ω w « kl -Η Λ 3 C «J Η ο α μ -4 Φ Φ •J 14 « > η α φ « f i n g '

ι

φ c Λ Ο 4J W

Ι * 3 U Φ "β •4-1 > 4J

4 -Η α ή Φ υ η

β C c 1 ο 3 -Η f t *i Ο β Ο "a φ β Λ C 0 «w c Η 4J ι

ν

α Η 3 CT 3 09 C & -Η Π « c -η φ β

^

31 -4 Μ

Ο

Τ
4

3 ^ 'S n e u

αι ρ

U r-

β 9 3

-rl

α C 4J Μ C δ

8

u

I . «J β U Δ >

(0 C Ό Φ Ο β

4-1 +J > ο -1 +J * υ χ ν ν ι-> U Λ 01 ο ο»

U υ

I

·Μ c 4 t

β) Β) •Η Χ to Β

c

Q, Ο

Β

• a s η α >1

SΟ

C Φ Μ ί ί Η > C Λ 3 I -Η Μ ο Ό « 4J 91 -Η φ ν υ ι £ 4J + « φ ϊ « j : >4 4J c U Η h h Η ο Ό β Ο Ή Οι , Ό 4J 'S c •Η ΟΙ "Μ χ c il Η s

•η •w μ φ u

3 4JΟ b

-η ι %4 c Φ Ή -C Ή 6 η Ο· ο Η Μ · φ α, φ C Μ £ Ο Φ Φ U Ή Μ w ω g ·-< ο) Λ 0 Φ Μ u α ο> ο ' « α >ι ι c ο 4J φ :

Φ C 4 Φ θ> η 4 ο b -Η ä s e -

152

E.Huls

As stated above, the typology of directives is set up from the following point of view: which aspect(s) of the directive speech act and/or its domain of relevance are selected to be put into words? Although I cannot deal with the entire table 1 at this point, I will offer some examples as an illustration. There is a large category of imperatives (code 1.1 - 1.12). Utilizing the imperative Kapiyi ort, the action is worded (=closing the door), the agent (=you) is implied in the imperative form, and the illocutionary force (^directive) counts as conventionally expressed in the imperative. With the explicit performative type Kapiyi örtmeni rica ederim (code 2), the action (^closing the door), the agent (=you) and the illocutionary force (=request) are explicitly mentioned. Using the formulation Kapiyi örtebilir misinl (code 5.1), the action and the agent are stated, but a misunderstanding is possible concerning the directive aspect of the formulation (one can simply accept it as a question about the addressee's ability). In the formulation Kapiyi örtmelisin (code 6.1) the action and the agent are also stated, but this time couched in an assertion on moral necessity. And with the formulation Kapisiz köyde mi dogdun? (code 8; more literally: Were you born in a village without doors?·, a translation might be: Were you born in a barn7) neither the propositional content of the directive (=you close the door), nor the illocutionary force of the utterance (=directive) is worded. In this formulation the relationship between what is said and what is meant is relatively indirect. The same can be said for Soguk geliyor (code 9: There is a draft). Also apparent in the latter is that something other than the action, the agent or the directive character is selected for formulation. In the right half of table 1, the types are grouped together under the more general headings derived from discussions about language and social inequality. The expressions Can you and Are you willing are both indicative of an orientation implying personal considerations towards the addressee. The imperatives and the explicit performative are all interpreted as direct. 1 want you to and Are you willing to are both interpreted as embedded (see under directness 2), but there is a difference in the kind of frame that is used (see under directness 1): the former frame refers to a felicity condition (this notion is used in section 1 and clarified in footnote 1); the latter does not. The last two types found in table 1, the question directive and the hint, show immense diversity in content. For these types a subdivision is made concerning 'theme': what reason or condition does the speaker supply in order to move the addressee to the desired act? The speaker can, for example, call attention to his own feelings, a sanction or a general norm. Table 2 gives an overview of the distinctions that are made for 'theme'. Analogous to table 1, this table also gives an overview of the interpretation under

Directness, Explicitness and Orientation

153

the more general headings. The paradigm of closing doors is excluded from this table, as it leads to artificial and anomalous examples. T a b l e 2:

O v e r v i e w of the t h e m e s d i s t i n g u i s h e d w i t h i n the d i r e c t i v e t y p e s a n d 'hint'

Code

Theme

X

N e e d o r feelings o f the

2

Necessity/Usefulness*

speaker

"Txplicitnesa

'question

Directness 1

Directness 2

indirect

indirect

no

personal

indirect

indirect

no

general

directive1

Orientation speaker

(Im)possibility

indirect

indirect

no

general

4

Norm, rule, general

indirect

indirect

no

general

5

Sanction

indirect

indirect

no

rights, duties, sanctions

6

Consequence

Indirect

indirect

no

none

7

Address term and/or getter

indirect

indirect

yes

none

8

Subjunctive singular

assertive

indirect

indirect

no

none

9

I m p e r s o n a l or p a s s i v e f o r m u l a t i o n / I m p e r a t i v e 3rd p e r s o n *

indirect

indirect

no

none

10

S t a t e m e n t about b e h a v i o u r

indirect

indirect

yes

none

11

L o c a t i v e of p e r s o n or

indirect

indirect

no

none

12

Other

indirect

indirect

no

none

3

*

A translation buy him a red A translation t o s e a r c h for

statement

attention

place*·

of a n e x a m p l e : "Red b a l l s are sold at the V i v o ". T h e c h i l d w a n t s his father to b a l l in a s h o p n a m e d V i v o . o f a n e x a m p l e : "Wherever a r e the k n i t t i n g n e e d l e s ? " . T h e a d d r e s s e e is r e q u e s t e d the k n i t t i n g n e e d l e s .

The directive speech acts in the research material are coded in terms of table 1 and 2. Some preliminary results of this description will be presented below.

4. RESULTS

First, we should comment on the frequency of the use of a number of types in our typology, as presented in table 1. Some types are clearly absent in our Turkish language material such as e.g. the embedding in the sincerity condition (type 5.2). This is also the case with the moral appeal (type 6.1). The absence of the type 'you must' is especially strange, as this type is frequently used in The Netherlands. In comparison to Dutch proportions it is also remarkable that 'objective necessity' did not occur. Also, the explicit performative type (2.1) is not found in the Turkish family. This type, however, was not found in the Dutch families either. Although these types belong to the formal possibilities of the language, and, with the exception of 2.1, do not seem to be rarities, they are not represented in our material. Some of the imperative forms are also clearly absent: 1.3, 1.8 and 1.12. In Netherlandic literature on Turks, they are depicted as 'imperative' (e.g.

154

E.Huls

Eppink 1982). We thought that this might be caused by an undifferentiated perception in the sense that one did not take into account that the Turkish category 'imperative', when compared with Netherlandic, is more differentiated. Although the Turkish category 'imperative' is differentiated, the use that our family made of it, is not: the bulk of the imperatives (83%) had the form of the simple stem, whereas the other imperative subcategories contained small proportions up to a maximum of 2 to 3%. Thus, for the family being studied, the differentiation in imperatives can be omitted from now on. After these introductory comments on the selection of specific types, we will now proceed to the treatment of the results under the general headings 'directness', 'explicitness' and 'orientation'. Table 3 contains the structure of the directive repertoire of the Turkish family, the mother and the pre-schooler with respect to directness 1. Results from our two Dutch families have been added for comparison purposes. Table 3: Structure of the d i r e c t i v e repertoire of the families, the mothers and the p r e - s c h o o l e r s r e g a r d i n g directness 1 (percentages and numbers).

T u r k i s h family mother pre-schooler

47..5 48,.6 47..3

3..3 3..0 2.,3

3 .6 2..3 7,.6

4 .2 . 3..3 4 .6 .

41..5 43..0 38..2

100% 100« 100«

1006 484 131

D u t c h family - lower class mother pre-schooler

28,.9 23..3 24..6

7..0 4.,5 17.,4

6..0 6..2 7..6

11..8 11,.3 9,

.8

46..3 54 40 .7

100« 100« 100«

2110 984 243

D u t c h family - higher mother pre-schooler

25..5 28..4 25..8

7..2 5.,5 9.,5

13 .4 12..5 7,.1

14..8 11..9 26..8

39,.2 41..7 30 .9

100« 100« 100«

2106 978 374

class

The high scores of the Turkish family with regard to directness are immediately apparent. These scores stand for very homey scenes such as illustrated in fragment 1. Ellipses are more frequent in the Dutch families, with the preschoolers outstanding in their use of this form. It seems that, in the Netherlandic language, ellipses are chosen when brevity is required. We have the impression that, in a lot of instances, the Turkish imperative is a short form, thus there is no need to choose an ellipsis for the sake of brevity. Both kinds of embedded directives are not very frequent in the Turkish family. The Dutch higher class family yields a high score on these points; the lower class family takes a position in between. A point that needs further research is the high score of the Turkish pre-schooler under 'frame concerning felicity'.

Directness, Explicitness and Orientation

'S V •Η 1-1 IM Λ οι

ϊ 4J 3 4J 10 U 01

Μ

Φ Β

Λ Ü 01 Μ IM

Ζ Ol 4) > υ φ μ •Η Ό 4J u φ Ή •σ •Η ο

χ φ I Μ 4J C ιβ Μ b

ν αι Μ


-Η Ο U αι & 0) 3 υ 1« Ο a α

•rl C

^ 4J U 01 Ή 3 •Q ·ι~>

I

Ή υ 0 u υ

5

^

Ol V Ε 0 0

ä Ο C Ό (Β

Τ3 £ 10 •s ο •Q § 31 0)

Ιη 01 •υ 01 ο ο,

Ό R

1) Ρ< to

l-ι

I Κ ς 0ι (0 »1 Μ Η 0 bi Λ R Η •α C Μ •5 b]

'SI Ρ· ü ι • ο Μ 1 «t

)Η Ιβ rH gl C

3

σ> η S 3 .41 ιβ 4) -Ρ ΙΛ β ιβ tie - Η id -Η 3 41 fc Ο ιβ rH 4) Λ Λ Μ &5J

Dl 3 4J ΙΟ

Ol c ο οι -H fl •P

t* η 41

> •Ρ £ Η Ή •Ο Μ Η Ο 4) to τ*

Ο Ο ig Ü -Η Φ Ο fl

41 •Ρ

Λ

α

ο •ρ G 41 Ο U

162

E.Huls

family's origin from an 'illiterate' area with limited educational opportunities has left such a strong impact on the socialization of a pre-schooler who has lived in The Netherlands since he was a toddler. Future research will proceed in two directions. To avoid the impression that all Turkish families are the same the descriptive basis of this study will be broadened with a second Turkish family from a different background. We hope to show some of the variation in Turkish directive style and perhaps the results presented here can be more definitely attributed to the family's rural background. Additionally, the data will be explored from the perspective of Brown & Levinson's (1978) framework on politeness strategies. In the present article, we have studied the data from the perspective of participation in school and societal life. Although this perspective is undoubtedly relevant, one can criticize it as a limited description of the family interaction. The notion 'politeness' assumes a central position in Brown and Levinson's work. It summarizes the ways in which the (unavoidable) threat of losing one's face (Goffman 1955) is dealt with in social interaction. Two groups can be distinguished. One relates to the human need for intimacy and familiarity; these are the so-called positive politeness forms. The other group is related to the need of not being impinged upon; these are the so-called negative politeness forms. Brown and Levinson offer a great range in politeness strategies. They deal with the phenomena that are represented in the typology of directives in the present article: e.g. embedding is indicative of creating distance and negative politeness, imperatives are indicative of familiarity and positive politeness. However, many other language phenomena that also play a significant role are distinguished. In future research Brown and Levinson's proposals for the description of positive and negative politeness phenomena will be applied to the data. Every society, social group, etc. uses politeness strategies of both types. The choice of a particular strategy is based upon a calculation of the costs and rewards of alternatives. Although these aspects are thought to be universal, considerable cross-cultural variation may exist in specific uses of politeness strategies. Sociological variables influence the weight of a face-threatening act. By using informants, we shall try to gain insight into what Turkish people view as relatively heavy and relatively light facethreatening acts as well as which language phenomena they perceive as creating distance and which ones they view as creating intimacy (analogous to Tannen (1982) and Hill et al. (1986)).2

Directness, Explicitness and

Orientation

163

NOTES 1. The notion 'felicity condition' may need some clarification. Felicity conditions are those conditions "necessary for the successful and felicitous performance of the act" (Se^rle 1975: 71). An utterance can only be accepted as a directive if the felicity conditions are fulfilled. These are: the speaker sincerely wants the addressee to perform the act, the addressee is able to perform the act, and prior to the directive, the addressee did not intend to perform the act (see meaning factors 2,4 and 8 in Garvey's list in section 1). 2. Under the title "An interactional sociolinguistic approach to hierarchy and social distance in Turkish families" this study is partially supported by the Special Programme Research Ethnic Minorities, which is funded by the Netherlands Organization for the Advancement of Pure Research, ZWO. Asuman Söylemez provided the transcription of the data. She also supplied information on questions regarding the Turkish language. Wim van den Munkhof and Adrienne van Wartum provided the sub-script of the material. Anneke van de Mond is analyzing the data in terms of turn-taking mechanisms. I am grateful to the Turkologist E.J. Zürcher for his contribution to this article.

REFERENCES Aksu, A. (1973) The development of request forms in Turkish children. Unpublished paper. Aksu, A. (1974) Order of emergence of request forms in terms of semantic complexity. Unpublished paper. Bernstein, B. (1973) Class, codes and control. Volume 1: Theoretical studies towards a sociology of language, St. Albans Herts, Paladin. Brown, P. & S. Levinson (1978) Universale in language usage: politeness phenomena, in E.N. Goody (ed.), Questions and politeness: strategies in social interaction, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 56-289. Eppink, A. (1982) Cultuurverschillen en communicatie: problemen bij de hulpverlening aan migranten in Nederland, Samson, Alphen aan de Rijn. Ervin-Tripp, S. (1976) Is Sybil there? The structure of some American English directives, in Language in Society 5, 25-66. Ervin-Tripp, S. & C. Mitchell-Kernan (eds.) (1977) Child discourse, Academic Press, London. Garvey, C. (1975) Requests and responses in children's speech, in Child Language 2, 4163. Gecas, V. (1979) The influence of social class on socialization, in W.R. Burr, R. Hill, F.I. Nye & I.L· Reis (eds.), Contemporary theories about the family, volume 1, Free Press, New York, 365-404. GofTman, E. (1955) On face-work: an analysis of ritual elements in social interaction, in Psychiatry 8, 213-231. Gumperz, J. (ed.) (1982) Language and social identity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Hess, R.D. & V.C. Shipman (1967) Cognitive elements in maternal behaviour, in J.P. Hill (ed.), Minnesota symposia on child psychology, volume 1. The University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 57-81. Hill, B., S. Ide, S. Ikuta, A. Kawasaki & T. Ogino (1986) Universale of linguistic politeness; quantitative evidence from Japanese and American English, in Journal of Pragmatics 10, 347-371.

164

E.Huls

Hollos, Μ. & W. Beeman (1978) The development of directives among Norwegian and Hungarian children: an example of communicative style in culture, in Language in Society 7, 345- 355. House, J . & G. Kasper (1981) Politeness markers in English and German, in F. Coulmas (ed.), Conversational routine, Mouton, Den Haag, 157-185. Huls, E. (1982) Taalgebruik in het gezin en sociale ongelijkheid; een interactioneel sociolinguistisch onderzoek, Ph.D. dissertation K.U. Nijmegen. Huls, E. & A. Van de Mond (1987) De toegang tot verbale interactie in Turkse gezinnen, in D. Springorum & A. Scholtens (eds.), Gespreksanalyse. Uitgangspunten en methoden in gespreksanalytisch onderzoek, K.U. Nijmegen, Nijmegen, in press. Levinson, S.C. (1983) Pragmatics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Lewis, G . (1984) Turkish Grammar, Oxford University Press, Oxford, (4th edition). Ochs, E. & B.B.Schieffelin (eds.) (1979) Developmental pragmatics, Academic Press, New York. Redhouse (1983) £agda$ Türk$e-Ingilizce sözlügü, Redhouse Press, Istanbul. Redhouse (1984) Yeni Türkfe-Ingilizce sözlük, Redhouse Press, Istanbul. Ri§vanoglu, S., M. Priester & L. Brouwer (1983) Turkse gezinnen in Amsterdam, Interimrapport C.O.M.T., Leiden. Searle, J . (1975) Indirect speech acts, in P. Cole & J . R . Morgan (eds.), Syntax and semantics, volume 3: speech acts, Academic Press, New York, 59-82. Searle, J . (1976) The classification of illocutionary acts, in Language in Society 5, 1-24. Searle, J . (1977) Taalhandelingen; een taalfilosofisch essay, Het Spectrum, Utrecht/Antwerpen. Tannen, D. (1982) Ethnic style in male-female conversation, in Gumperz (1982), 217-231. Weigel, M.M. & R.M. Weigel (1985) Directive use in a migrant agricultural community, in Language in Society 14, 63-79.

Socio-cultural Predictors of minority children's first and second Language Proficiency Ludo Th. Verhoeven

1. INTRODUCTION

It is generally accepted that in the process of successive acquisition of two languages the tempo of acquisition of both LI and L2 is influenced by socio-cultural factors (Gardner & Lambert 1972; Fishman 1977; Van Els et al. 1984). Language contact and cultural orientation are usually defined as the relevant predicting variables. With respect to language contact Tosi (1984) pointed out that in the case of first generation immigrant children LI will often be in a favourable position. Its development may originally benefit from a rich infra-structure in the family, but later on, if not reinforced by conditions of full exposure, the mother tongue may develop only within restricted domains. With regard to the acquisition of L2, Schumann (1978) pointed out that social and psychological contact of the family with target language speakers will enhance the development of L2. Klein & Dittmar (1979) demonstrated that the L2 proficiency of Italian and Spanish immigrant workers in Germany was highly influenced by their contacts with Germans during leisure time. Wong-Fillmore (1976) showed that the interaction with peers is a strong determinant of L2 acquisition in children. McLaughlin (1985:145163) decided on the basis of a review of studies on interaction patterns inside and outside the school that the tempo of L2 acquisition is not only influenced by the extent of contact with L2 speaking persons, but also by the quality of such contacts. Contact situations are called optimal when children have an opportunity to use L2 in a meaningful context where they receive feedback from native speakers. The content of cultural orientation is far from clear (see De Bot, Broeder & Verhoeven 1985). In general terms, it is defined as the attitudes minority children have developed towards the native language and culture and the majority language and culture. These attitudes determine the degree of identification with the two cultures. Lambert (1976) distinguished four possible identification patterns: identification with both cultures, identification with majority culture/rejection of minority culture, identification with minority culture/rejection of majority culture, or a failure to identify with either culture. Which identification pattern minority children develop is said to be important for LI as well as L2 development. Okamura-Bichard

166 L. Th. Verhoeven (1985) found empirical evidence for this claim in a study of first and second language acquisition among Japanese children in the United States. In other studies it was found that the attitudes and motivation of ethnic minority children are seriously influenced by parent attitudes (Gardner 1968; Fishman 1977). Several recent studies of Turkish and Moroccan children in The Netherlands led to inconclusive results regarding the relationship between sociocultural factors and L2 learning. In a study of 8 to 13-year-old children Appel (1984) concluded that such a relationship could not clearly be established. He argued that many children may need a strong grip on their own culture when acquiring a second language. However, the operationalization of cultural orientation Appel used can be qualified as rather poor. In a longitudinal study of Turkish and Moroccan children from six to nine years old, Vermeer (1986) found a significant correlation between children's language choice and L2 proficiency in that the frequent choice of Netherlandic was related to high proficiency in that language. Contact of children with Netherlandic-speaking persons also correlated positively with L2 proficiency. No significant correlation was found between motivation to learn Netherlandic and proficiency in Netherlandic. However, the latter result may be due to a poor operationalization of children's motivation. Lalleman (1986) investigated the relationship between L2 proficiency of 6-year-old Turkish children and three attitudinal variables among their parents: social distance, cultural distance and psychological distance. Social distance related to social contact with L2 groups, cultural distance related to cultural assimilation, and psychological distance related to attitudes which the L2 group adopts toward the LI community and vice versa. She found moderate but significant correlations between children's L2 proficiency on the one hand, and parents' social distance and cultural distance on the other. However, the correlation between children's L2 proficiency and parents' psychological distance was not significant. Finally, Boers, Van den Bosch & Verhoeven (1987) investigated the role of socio-cultural factors in L2 acquisition of 5 to 9-year-old Turkish and Moroccan children. They found language contact and cultural orientation to be strong predictors of L2 proficiency at the ages of five and seven. However, at the age of nine the predictive power of cultural orientation was only moderately high, while that of language contact was fully absent. The latter result was explained by the children's prolonged exposure to the second language. In the present section a report is given of a study on socio-cultural predictors of the language proficiency of 6-year-old Turkish children in The Netherlands. In two respects the present study is different from the studies conducted so far. First, both the first and second language of the children will be taken into account. It will be determined which socio-

Socio-cultural Predictors

167

cultural variables are relevant predictors of the children's proficiency levels in both Turkish and Netherlandic. Second, a multiple indicator approach is followed in operationalizing the children's socio-cultural background. Factors related to the family are distinguished from child related factors. Moreover, socio-cultural data are collected using three types of informants: parents, teachers and children.

2. DESIGN OF THE STUDY

2.1. Subjects A group of 74 Turkish children was selected from the first forms of ten primary schools in fairly big cities in the eastern part of The Netherlands. All the children have Turkish as their native language and had been living in The Netherlands for at least two years, during which period they attended nursery school. The parents of the children originated from villages in Central Anatolia and the Black Sea region in Turkey; in The Netherlands they all worked in factories or were owners of small shops. The group of subjects consisted of 36 boys and 38 girls with a mean age of 6;7 years. 2.2. Instruments 2.2.1. Language proficiency Elicitation tasks were constructed in order to assess phonological, lexical and morphosyntactic subskills in Turkish and Netherlandic. Phonological skills were measured by means of phoneme discrimination tasks. In such tasks children are required to distinguish words that differ in one phoneme, or in the position or number of two phonemes (Netherlandic examples: kas/kaas (cash/cheese), dorp/drop (village/licorise), Turkish examples göl/ giil (lake/rose), ilk/ilik (first/narrow). For each pair of words children are asked to indicate whether the words are the same or different. In the Netherlandic task 50 word pairs were administered: 36 different and 14 identical ones. In the Turkish task 30 word pairs were considered: 22 different and 8 identical ones. The scores on the two phoneme discrimination tasks were determined by the number of correctly discriminated items. In order to measure lexical skills, productive and receptive vocabulary tasks were developed. The productive vocabulary tasks use pictures for recognition; the receptive vocabulary tasks involve listening to a particular word and selecting the correct referent out of four pictures. The procedure adopted in constructing the vocabulary tasks was to rank the items in order of supposed difficulty. On the basis of ratings from Dutch and Turkish teachers a list of word referents was developed from which the items for

168 L. Th. Verhoeven the productive and receptive vocabulary tasks were selected (see Verhoeven 1987a). The so-called 'Streeflijst Woordenschat' of Kohnstamm et al. (1981) was taken as a starting point. This word list consists of a corpus of 6,785 Netherlandic words, evaluated by teachers on the question as to whether they thought that a particular word on the list, given in a proper context, had to be understood by 6-year-old native Dutch children. First, the words on the list were placed in the order of these ratings, from 100 to 30 per cent agreement. In addition, 1 out of any 20 successive words on the list was randomly selected. Thus, a shorter list, also ranging from 100 to 30 per cent agreement, was arrived at. From this list words were excluded if they were representative of items of Dutch culture. For all the words on the restricted list Turkish equivalents were sought. The resulting list of 326 Turkish words was handed to a group of 25 Turkish teachers working in Dutch schools with the request to mark the words which they thought could be understood, if presented in context, by 6-year-old native Turkish children in The Netherlands. After the Turkish teachers had worked through the list, the words were ordered according to the teachers' ratings. Words were removed from the list if they had a rating which was very different from the ratings of Dutch teachers. The final list of words was looked upon as relatively culturally-unbiased. From this list two samples were taken: 108 for the receptive vocabulary tasks and 80 for the productive vocabulary tasks. Because of the supposedly increasing difficulty of the items of the vocabulary tasks, a break-off point was used. This means that the task was broken off after a child had given no response on five subsequent items. The scores on the tasks were given as the total number of correct items. Morphosyntactic proficiency in the two languages was measured by means of sentence imitation tasks. In each task, 24 sentences were presented to be reproduced by the child one by one. In (1) a sentence from the Netherlandic sentence imitation task is given; (2) displays a sentence from the Turkish sentence imitation task. (1)

De tuin waarin zij speelden is niet groot. (The garden in which they played is not large.)

(2)

Babam erken kalkti 9ünkü ?ok i§i var. (My father woke up early, because he had a lot of work to do.)

Any subsequent block of four sentences was semantically related to minimize artificiality. The aspects under consideration were specified beforehand and fell into three subcategories, for Turkish as well as for Netherlandic: function words, word final markers and word order.

169

Socio-cultural Predictors

2.2.2. Socio-cultural factors With respect to the socio-cultural background of the children, seven factors were distinguished: four were related to the family, three were related to the child itself (see Figure 1).

Domain

Factor

Informants

Family

Language contact at home Parent cultural attitudes Parent cultural behaviour Attitudes toward L1/L2 education

Parents Parents Teachers Teachers

Child

Language contact at school Attitudes toward daily life Attitudes toward cultural symbols

Teachers Children Children

Figure 1: Operationalization

of socio-cultural

factors

With respect to the family-related factors, two data-collection procedures were followed. First, a semi-structured interview with the parents was administered by the Turkish teacher in cooperation with the Dutch teacher. Two groups of questions were considered: questions about contact with Turkish and Netherlandic in the family and questions about the parents' attitudes toward the minority and majority cultures. The former questions concerned use of Turkish and Netherlandic within the family (5 questions), contact with persons outside the family (4 questions) and use of media (4 questions). The latter questions concerned the celebration of Turkish holidays (§eker bayrami,