This study deals with morphosyntactic variation in Paraná Dutch, an endangered heritage variety of Dutch spoken in the southern Brazilian state of Paraná. Its original objectives were (i) to...Show moreThis study deals with morphosyntactic variation in Paraná Dutch, an endangered heritage variety of Dutch spoken in the southern Brazilian state of Paraná. Its original objectives were (i) to describe divergences from Dutch as spoken in the Netherlands (NLD) as well as retained dialectal features (ii) to compare these variations to findings of other studies on Dutch as a heritage language (HL), and (iii) to relate the findings to extralinguistic features. Due to the situation of intergenerational language loss encountered during the fieldwork conducted for this study, it was deemed important to add a fourth objective, namely to assess the vitality of the heritage variety. No previous linguistic research on language variation in Dutch as a HL in Paraná exists, and this study will therefore extend our knowledge of morphosyntactic divergences and dialectal retentions in the Dutch heritage varieties. More than 22 hours of naturalistic speech data of 82 Dutch heritage speakers (HSs) in three communities – Arapoti, Carambeí and Castrolanda – was gathered between November 2018 and January 2019, and coded for morphosyntactic divergence from NLD or dialectal variation. The sample consisted of speakers of different ages (16-91), generations (first till fourth) and with varying levels of exposure to and usage of Dutch. Two models for language vitality assessment (UNESCO, EGIDS) were used to describe the endangerment of Paraná Dutch. According to the models, the heritage variety is definitively endangered (UNESCO), and threatened or shifting (EGIDS). Morphosyntactic divergences from NLD found in the speech of the participants include the overgeneralization of SVO word order, omission of determiners, variation in grammatical gender assignment, variation in nominal plural markers, pronoun drop, and variation in present verb inflection. Morphosyntactic divergences from the standard language that can be attributed to Dutch dialects or regional languages include the merger of the verbs kennen ‘to know’ and kunnen ‘can’, use of heb ‘to have’ for the 3SG.PRES, and the use of periphrastic doen ‘to do’. Of the morphosyntactic divergences found in the data, the six mentioned previously were used by a sizeable part of the sample (at least ten participants). Many of these divergences have also been attested in Dutch heritage varieties in Anglophone countries, Indonesia and in other parts of Brazil. The divergences from NLD are either due to interference from the majority language Portuguese, due to internal development in the HL, or due to a combination of the former two (multiple causation). Participants whose speech contained morphosyntactic divergences from NLD tend to be of the second generation or later and have a lower usage of and exposure to Dutch than the average of the sample. Although most of the dialectal features present in the speech of the first-generation participants have not been attested in the speech of later generations, some have been retained or even spread throughout the community. The three morphosyntactic features that originate from Dutch dialects or regional languages mentioned above have been retained and transmitted to speakers of the second generation or later.Show less
This thesis provides evidence for a perceived overextension of labialisation of coda consonants following rounded vowels in the speech of (Saigon) Vietnamese speakers in the Netherlands. The...Show moreThis thesis provides evidence for a perceived overextension of labialisation of coda consonants following rounded vowels in the speech of (Saigon) Vietnamese speakers in the Netherlands. The regular labialisation of velar codas after rounded vowels seemed to appear in alveolar codas as well. Sixteen speakers participated in a picture-naming task designed to elicit words containing both types of codas following rounded and unrounded vowels. The speakers were either second generation/heritage speakers, first generation/baseline speakers or homeland speakers. Although the data were limited, evidence was found that the overextension is a change in progress (at least in the Netherlands). This change has made most progress in heritage speakers, followed by baseline speakers and homeland speakers show the fewest signs of the overextension. The overextension is also limited to codas following two of the three rounded vowels of Vietnamese, whereas the original labialisation occurs after all rounded vowels. It was thus concluded that the overextension is a change in progress, possibly limited to speakers of Vietnamese in the Netherlands. The fact that heritage speakers show the greatest change, provides new perspectives in the field of the phonologies of heritage languages.Show less
