The origins of the language - Dutch Language; based on Northon Anthology of English Language and Literature.
Dutch is the third Germanic language. It comes after
English and German, but is spoken by far more people than Swedish, Danish,
Norwegian or Frisian. In fact, with its approximately twenty-two million
speakers. Compared with most of the world's languages the history of Dutch is
very well documented, and for this reason it gained attention very early on in
international linguistics. Outside, however, not much is known about Dutch,
certainly far less than is known about the Netherlands
and Belgium ,
the countries where Dutch is the standard language. Many a tourist in the Low Countries is surprised to find that there is a Dutch
language which is quite distinct from German or English.
Needless to say ‘Nederlands’,
‘Hollands’ and ‘Vlaams’ are three separate names for the same
language. This lack of clarity in terminology is sometimes confusing for
foreigners, so confusing that it regularly leads to the misconception that the
standard language in the Netherlands
is different from that in Belgium .
This is not the case. Dutch is spoken in both Belgium
and the Netherlands .
There is a ready historical explanation for the difference in terminology:
because the standard language in the Netherlands is based primarily on the
dialect of the province of Holland, in the other provinces the designation ‘Hollands’ came to be used to describe the
standard language, whereas in Belgium ‘Vlaams’ was used to indicate what was not
French. However, today ‘Nederlands’ is the official and most usual
designation in both countries.. Languages do not simply
appear out of the blue, its origin is proceeded by the story. The story of Indo-European languages can be traced back to around 3000 bc, but at that time there was no
separate Dutch language, any more than there was a separate English or German
language. Germanic split itself off from Indo-European in the period 1000-500 bc. Round about the beginning of
the Christian era Germanic began to diversify, although the different dialects
could probably be understood by the speakers of any one of them for a long
time. The Germanic languages did not differentiate themselves definitively from
each other until after the fall of the Western Roman
empire in 476,
in the period of the migrations. If we confine ourselves
to the West Germanic group, two things which happened in that period are of
great significance. The first of these is the crossing of the Angles, Saxons
and Jutes from the continent to England ,
in the fifth century ad. This
marked the beginning in England
of the history of English as a distinct branch of Germanic. The other
significant event is the characteristic change which took place from around 600 ad in a number of Germanic dialects in
the south of Germany ,
known as the socalled High German sound shift. This brought about a striking
difference between, on the one hand, High German (zu, Pfeffer, etc.), and on the other hand, Dutch
and Low German (toe, peper).
If one had to give a date for the beginning of Dutch as a separate language,
then it would be best to say it was in the period about 600 ad, when English, Dutch and
German each began to go their own separate way.
The
language of the period 600-1200 is mostly referred to as Old Dutch. From the
period 600-800 virtually nothing has been handed down to us apart from
geographical names, personal names and a very small number of runic
inscriptions. In that respect the history of Dutch parallels that of English and
German. The oldest surviving Dutch to be handed down probably dates from the
end of the eighth or the beginning of the ninth century: the Holland List of Pagan Practices (Hollandse lijst van heidense
praktijken) and the Utrecht
Baptismal Vow (Utrechtse
doopbelofte). The oldest rather longer text that has been preserved is the Wachtendonck Psalms (Wachtendonckse psalmen): fragments
from an interlinear psalm translation from the tenth century. Also important
for our knowledge of Old Dutch is the Egmond
Williram (Egmondse Williram,
frequently also referred to as the Leiden
Williram), a translation and
adaptation of what was originally a German commentary on the Canticles,
undertaken presumably in the monastery at Egmond. Very well-known, but not the
oldest Old Dutch, is the sentence: ‘hebban
olla uogala nestas hagunnan hinase hi[c] [e]nda thu uuat unbidan uue nu’, from the eleventh century (preserved
in the Bodleian Library, in Oxford ).
All in all, little Old Dutch has been preserved;
decidedly less than is the case with Old English or Old High German. In this
context we must bear in mind that in the
If we take present-day frontiers, then three
dialects were spoken originally in this area: Frisian, or at least Inguaeonic
dialects in the north and along the western coast; Saxon
dialects in the east (contiguous with the Low German area); and Lower
Franconian in the centre and south. It is these Lower Franconian dialects that
we designate as Old Dutch, and that we shall come across later as Middle Dutch
dialects (1200-1500), and it is from these that the standard Dutch language has
developed.From the thirteenth century onwards a wealth of material
has been handed down. The population of the Low Countries
increased rapidly in that period. The habitable areas were considerably
expanded by land reclamation and impoldering. Great cities grew up in the
south, such as Bruges , Ghent ,
Brussels , Mechelen and Antwerp . With the appearance of the cities a
new population group came into existence alongside the nobility, the clergy and
the country people: the townspeople. It was these townsfolk who first began to
use the native language, Dutch, also as a written language on a large scale.
The greater part of the texts which have come down to us from the thirteenth
century come from the cities in the south. In the north (the Netherlands as
we know them today) cities did not flourish until the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries.
In the beginning there was no standard language.
People used the dialect of their own city or region as the written language. It
is evident, however, that as early as the thirteenth century the language of a
city such as Bruges
served to some extent as a model. In the fourteenth and fifteenth century, due
to changes in political and economic circumstances, Ghent ,
Brussels and Antwerp took over the role of linguistic model.
Through their political history the separate areas of the Low
Countries became more and more an entity, so that the need for a
standard language increased. In addition, from around 1450 onwards, the art of
printing contributed to a certain gradual standardisation of language and
spelling. Yet with regard to texts from before 1500, for instance the various
translations of the Bible, it is mostly easy to see in which language they were
written. Not until the sixteenth century can we state that there was a standard
written language in the Low Countries .The sixteenth and seventeenth centuries are without doubt
the period during which the Dutch language underwent the greatest changes. This
is also a period of considerable change in the general history of the Low
Countries, and in which the Netherlands
and Belgium
emerged for the first time as two separate political entities.
At the
beginning of the sixteenth century the Low Countries still formed a single more
or less loosely connected area, in which the various parts (among others,
Holland, Brabant, Flanders, Utrecht, Hainault etc.) were conjoined by marriage,
inheritance or conquest. Under Charles v the parts still had a degree of
autonomy, but everything changed with the Eighty Years' War (1568-1648), when
the Low Countries rose up against Charles' son, Philip ii of Spain . At the height of the
conflict they withdrew their allegiance to Philip ii and the ‘United Provinces’ declared
their independence. Spain
refused to accept this, and tried to reconquer her lost territories. The
attempt was partly successful: the southern areas came under Spanish rule
again, but the north was able to retain its independence. With the Peace of
Münster (1648) the Low Countries were divided
along these lines. The northern provinces
together formed a new state (the Netherlands ),
the southern provinces (Belgium )
remained under Spanish authority.
This had
far-reaching consequences. The Northern Netherlands flourished to an extent
never known before, politically and economically as well as in terms of culture
and scholarship, whereas the Southern or Spanish Netherlands faced centuries of
stagnation and decline. After the fall of Antwerp
in 1585 there was a great stream of emigrants from the south, especially to the
cities of Holland (Amsterdam ,
Haarlem , Leiden
etc.).
In the north the process of standardisation of
the language continued. From the seventeenth century onwards the standard
language has been based on the dialect of the province of Holland
(mixed with southern elements on account of the large numbers of immigrants).
The other (northern) provinces turned increasingly to the language of Holland . From the
sixteenth century onwards dictionaries, grammars and spelling books appeared.
Dutch was used for all areas of life, including scholarly circles and the
(Protestant) church. An important step in the history of the standard language
is the appearance of an official translation of the Bible in 1637. Far more
than in earlier translations of the Bible into Dutch, the translation of 1637
is a deliberate attempt at compromise in language: this translation had to be
one which could be used throughout the whole
of what is now known as the Netherlands . Indeed, it has served in this capacity right into the
twentieth century.
The southern provinces (the Spanish, later
Austrian Netherlands, now Belgium )
played scarcely any part in this process of standardisation. It is true that in
the Dutch-speaking part the Dutch dialects remained in use, but the language of
the state, and later also the language of law and the church, was French.
Therefore there was no overarching standard language, and, moreover, contact with the Netherlands was
limited. In fact, in that part of the world, from the seventeenth century up to
the end of the nineteenth century, the use of Dutch (i.e. Dutch dialects) was
driven further and further back by French.
In the seventeenth century, under the leadership
of Jan van Riebeeck, Dutch colonists established themselves in South Africa .
Their language developed there in a totally distinctive way, and over the
centuries has be-come increasingly
differentiated from Dutch, both in vocabulary and grammar. Modern Afrikaans can
still be understood, with some difficulty, by people who speak Dutch, but today
we must regard Dutch and Afrikaans as two separate languages. Broadly speaking, the Dutch language acquired in the
sixteenth and seventeenth centuries those characteristics which it still has
today. The original Germanic case system, still present in Middle Dutch,
disappeared after the sixteenth century. In this respect Dutch is more like
English, in which the cases also disappeared after the Middle English period,
whereas German has preserved its cases into the present time. In fact this
difference from German was apparent very early: in Old Dutch dative and accusative
tended to fuse, while in Old High German they remained distinct, as they do to
this day in modern German.
On the
other hand, Dutch developed a word order that is closer to German. Unlike in
English the verbs are not all placed together. In main clauses the conjugated
verb is in the second position, and the remaining verbs are at the end of the
sentence. Dutch also has a different word order for dependent clauses.
In
addition, Dutch has its own special characteristics, such as a future with zullen and gaan, a passive with worden and zijn; two genders for nouns(de and het) compared with the one (the) in English and the three (der, dieand das) in German; and highly developed use of
prepositional adverbs (erin,
daarop, waardoor, etc.) which
certainly do exist in English and German but enjoy only marginal use in those
languages.
Finally, the Dutch vocabulary contains fewer
Romance loan words than English, but more than German.The period of prosperity that the Netherlands
enjoyed in the seventeenth century was clearly past its peak in the eighteenth.
If the Netherlands
had been an important maritime power in the seventeenth century, in the
eighteenth its position in international politics grew steadily weaker. The economy
also stagnated. After the French conquest (1795-1813) the Netherlands had
little influence left. At the Congress of Vienna it was decided that the Northern Netherlands and the Austrian Netherlands should
be joined. The thinking behind this was that it would provide a stronger buffer
against the still feared France .
Although the Low Countries were indeed united for a short period, under the
Dutch king William i, the
tension very quickly increased enormously, and in 1830 the southern provinces
broke away and the independent kingdom
of Belgium was
proclaimed, achieving official recognition in 1839.
We must be mindful of these circumstances when
considering the history of the language. In the Netherlands the process of
standardisation continued. Around 1600 it is true that there was a standard
written language (main- ly because a more or less uniform spelling was used in the
various provinces), but there was still no standard pronunciation to go with
it. The dialect of the province of Holland , the most densely populated and economically
the strongest province, and in particular the dialect of a few cities in Holland (such as Haarlem
and Amsterdam ),
became the norm for the standard language. It was not until the second half of
the nineteenth century, however, that this standard pronunciation (mostly
referred to as‘Algemeen Beschaafd Nederlands’ (General Educated Dutch) or abn) was used by the educated
sectors of the population in all the provinces (of the Netherlands !).
When there were official rulings on spelling in the nineteenth century (1804,
Siegenbeek; 1863 De Vries & Te Winkel), it was clearly apparent that in
certain respects the norm for pronunciation was still not completely fixed.
However, by the end of the nineteenth century the norm was so generally
accepted that a champion of spelling reform such as R.A. Kollewijn could select
pronunciation as the basis for his plans.
In Belgium ,
developments were totally different. Under Spanish, then Austrian, and then
French rule no standard Dutch language could develop. The state, law, and
increasingly education used French. Contact with the Netherlands
was limited, so that people did not participate at all in the process of
standardisation which was taking place in the Netherlands . The Dutch dialects
were in a weak position compared to the dominant French, so that the use of
Dutch (i.e. Dutch dialects) was actually driven back ever further in that part
of the world. The short period of union between the Netherlands
and Belgium (1815-1830) and
even the deliberate pro-Dutch language policy of King William i were unable to reverse the decline of
Dutch in Belgium . Yet more than half the Belgian population were
Dutch-speaking (i.e. in Flanders; the South, i.e. Wallonia ,
was traditionally French-speaking). In the course of the nineteenth century
resistance to this neglect of Dutch began to grow. The Flemish movement, with
leaders such as Jan Frans Willems and Hendrik Conscience, stood up for the
rights of Dutch, mostly called ‘Flemish’ in those days. Originally it was a
romantic movement, focused on its own language and literature. However,
gradually the Flemish Movement also took on a social and political character,
and turned its attention to the emancipation of the Flemish (i.e.
Dutch-speaking) sector of the population. Contacts with the Netherlands
were deliberately strengthened. Very slowly, step by step, people succeeded in
improving the position of Dutch in Belgium . The first language laws
specifying equal rights for Dutch and French date from the end of the
nineteenth century, but it is actually only in the course of the twentieth
century that Dutch in Belgium
has achieved equality with French.
When the Flemish Movement began there was a
difference of opinion on what the standard language should be. On the one hand
there were those who advocated a separate ‘Flemish’ or ‘Belgian’ Dutch standard
language. On the other hand there were those who pleaded for association with
the standard language which already existed in the Netherlands . Both camps were in
agreement that one or other standard was essential, because in competing with
the powerful French language the variation in dialects was a serious
disadvantage. Those who favoured a separate Belgian standard Dutch were in a
weaker position than those who favoured the Dutch of the Netherlands : standardisation is a lengthy
process, and there was a standard already available (in the Netherlands ),
whereas a separate Belgian standard was a dream of the distant future.
Therefore, in the end the successful view was that it would be sensible for
Dutch-speaking Belgium to
associate itself with the standard language that had already developed in the Netherlands
over the centuries. In recent decades education, radio and television have
considerably increased the spread of the Dutch language of the Netherlands in Flemish Belgium . At
present, therefore, the situation in Belgium
is essentially no different from that in the Netherlands : in both countries
Dutch (abn)
is the language of culture, although there are sometimes slight but
recognisable differences in pronunciation. One could compare these to the
differences between British and American English. On the other hand the
standardisation of Dutch is certainly far stronger than the standardisation of
German, where even among the educated sectors of the nation there is still
considerable variation in dialect.The language battle in Belgium went on for more than a
hundred and fifty years, and one cannot say that it is completely over yet. No
lives have ever been lost in the battle, it is true, but it has made a profound
impact on society in Belgium .
It has been the cause of untold misery, bitterness and frustration. Belgian
domestic policy has actually been severely limited for the whole of the
twentieth century, and sometimes even damaged, by the French / Dutch conflicts.
The present-day transformation of Belgium into a federal state in
which the Flemish (i.e. Dutch-speaking) and the Walloon (i.e. French-speaking)
community each have a considerable measure of autonomy, is a direct consequence
of this (see The Low Countries 1993-94: 118-124).
In the Netherlands all
this went almost unnoticed. It is true that the Netherlands
are also bilingual (in the province
of Friesland some 400,000
inhabitants speak Frisian), but this has never led to sharp conflicts.
It can be
said that it was not until the twentieth century that Belgian Dutch and the
Dutch of the Netherlands
began to develop equally and together. Nowadays circumstances are less unequal,
and contact is intensifying all the time. Radio, television and education, and
considerable mobility on the part of the population, all work to the advantage
of a standard language, and to the further suppression of the dialects. At the
same time, however, the democratisation of education, which means that far more
than in the past all sections of the population participate in higher education
and training, is compelling a certain widening of the norm for pronunciation.
Around 1900 the standard pronunciation of Dutch was the exclusive
characteristic of a small upper social layer, but today the abnpronunciation can be heard not
only in all the provinces but also among all social classes. This has naturally
led to some broadening of the norm. With hindsight one must say that the norm
for pronunciation of a hundred years ago was extremely rigid even for those
days.
Moreover, in recent decades the influence of
foreigners, who settle temporarily or permanently in the Netherlands or Belgium and learn Dutch, has put
pressure on the norm for pronunciation. People in conservative circles are not
always happy about this, but seen objectively it increases the accessibility
and usefulness of Dutch. That applies also to the growth in the number of loan
words. As the world becomes smaller, so will living languages pick up more loan
words. What is more, Dutch seems to be very well able to incorporate the many
borrowings into its own phonetic system, and its own morphological and
syntactic rules. In 1980 the Netherlands and Belgium concluded the Language
Union.Treaty (see The
Low Countries 1993-94:
267-268). This treaty lays down the principle that the two countries must gear
their language policy to each other. This is important, among other things, for
a common system of spelling. By the way, the 1947-1954 spelling reform was also
a joint measure, without a treaty. However, apart from spelling, political
directives never have much influence on the development of language. Yet the
establishment of the Language Union may be seen as proof of the fact that
Dutch-speaking Belgium
recognises and wishes to have the same standard language as that of the Netherlands ,
and that people are determined to be part of the one Dutch language community.
When the Language Union was set up in 1980 it
was intended in the first place to further Belgian / Dutch relations. It is to
be anticipated that the Language Union will also be turning its attention more
and more towards European relations, and will defend the importance of Dutch in
the European Union. Within Europe Dutch is not one of the major languages, but it
is in the middle range. According to the extent to which they grow in number
and begin to do more, the organs of the European Union will make increasing use
of one or two languages of communication - probably English and German. Such a
situation is nothing new for the Netherlands . In centuries gone by
Latin was the language of scholarship and of the church, and later, in the
eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, French was the language of international diplomacy. That never did
Dutch any harm. On the contrary, it has only contributed to the open character
of the language. But it is of the greatest importance that Europe
should recognise how important all those diverse greater and lesser languages
are. And their interests will be better served by the use of one language, or
at most two, for international communication than by a disastrous rivalry
between eight, or eleven, or fourteen competing languages.
Komentarze
Prześlij komentarz