Samenvatting
Abstract: Incomplete mastery of dialect grammar engenders ‘hyperdialectisms’
which may be unconscious errors, but which may also be the result of indexical
resourcefulness, viz. the profiling of a regional identity. Fifty younger and older
speakers from the Brabantish city of Eindhoven (Netherlands) were first administered
an acceptability judgment task containing correct forms and three types of
hyperdialectisms featuring gender and number constraints. Following the survey,
the same respondents participated in a focus group discussion. Regression analysis
on the scaled ratings revealed that all three types of hyperdialectisms were rejected,
although it was especially the older respondents (almost all L1 dialect speakers) who
were weary of the incorrect forms. Analysis of the focus group data demonstrated
that older respondents are consciously aware of the rules of their dialect grammar,
and hate it when these rules are violated. Younger respondents showed almost no
meta-grammatical awareness, and admitted to ‘allowing’ the incorrect forms in some
contexts because they ‘sound Brabantish’. Identity construction, in other words, is at
the heart of hyperdialectal usage. Methodologically, this paper makes a plea for the
confrontation of quantitative data – which provide the backbone of analysis – with
qualitative data that offer access to motives for, and constraints on grammatical
variation.
which may be unconscious errors, but which may also be the result of indexical
resourcefulness, viz. the profiling of a regional identity. Fifty younger and older
speakers from the Brabantish city of Eindhoven (Netherlands) were first administered
an acceptability judgment task containing correct forms and three types of
hyperdialectisms featuring gender and number constraints. Following the survey,
the same respondents participated in a focus group discussion. Regression analysis
on the scaled ratings revealed that all three types of hyperdialectisms were rejected,
although it was especially the older respondents (almost all L1 dialect speakers) who
were weary of the incorrect forms. Analysis of the focus group data demonstrated
that older respondents are consciously aware of the rules of their dialect grammar,
and hate it when these rules are violated. Younger respondents showed almost no
meta-grammatical awareness, and admitted to ‘allowing’ the incorrect forms in some
contexts because they ‘sound Brabantish’. Identity construction, in other words, is at
the heart of hyperdialectal usage. Methodologically, this paper makes a plea for the
confrontation of quantitative data – which provide the backbone of analysis – with
qualitative data that offer access to motives for, and constraints on grammatical
variation.
| Originele taal-2 | Engels |
|---|---|
| Aantal pagina's | 39 |
| Tijdschrift | Linguistics |
| DOI's | |
| Status | E-pub ahead of print - 25 sep. 2024 |