Název: Nederlandse aanspreekvormen bij Poolse NVT-taalleerders
Variantní název:
- Dutch forms of address among students in Poland
Zdrojový dokument: Brünner Beiträge zur Germanistik und Nordistik. 2017, roč. 31, č. 1, s. 87-102
Rozsah
87-102
-
ISSN1803-7380 (print)2336-4408 (online)
Trvalý odkaz (DOI): https://doi.org/10.5817/BBGN2017-1-8
Trvalý odkaz (handle): https://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/137321
Type: Článek
Jazyk
Licence: Neurčená licence
Upozornění: Tyto citace jsou generovány automaticky. Nemusí být zcela správně podle citačních pravidel.
Abstrakt(y)
This paper reports on a research on the use of Dutch forms of address (i.e. the second-person pronouns u and je/jij) among students in Poland. It takes the address model proposed by Brown en Gilman and the findings of the research of Hannie Vermaas and Roel Vismans on the present use of Dutch forms of address in the Netherlands as its theoretical inspiration. Moreover it homes in on domain (as defined by Fishman and Clyne et al.) as factor for choice of address forms. The paper is based on a quantitative analysis of a questionnaire in which Polish respondents of three universities in Poland were asked to point out which pronoun they use in order to address a variety of interlocutors. The research itself aims at finding out to what extend the Polish respondents are aware of the current sociolinguistic trends and changes in the use of forms of address in spoken Dutch in the Netherlands.
Reference
[1] BROWN, R., GILMAN, A. (1960): 'The pronouns of power and solidarity'. Style in language. Sebeok (ed.). T.A. Boston: MIT Press, p. 253–76.
[2] CLYNE, M. (2009): Language and Human Relations. Styles of Address in Contemporary Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[3] FISHMAN, J. (1972): 'Domains and the Relationship between Micro- and Macrosociolinguistics'. Directions in Sociolinguistics. The Ethnography of Communication. ed. by John J. Gumperz and Dell Hymes. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 435–53.
[4] KUIKEN, F. (2011): '(Vreemde)taalverwerving en de contrastieve aanpak'. N/F – Association des Néerlandistes de Belgique francophone, Vol. 10, p. 13–26.
[5] ŁAŻIŃSKI, M. (2006): O panach i paniach, polskie rzeczowniki tytularne i ich asymetria rodzajopłciowa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
[6] MARCJANIK, M. (2008): Grzeczność w komunikacji językowej. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
[7] SALEMANS, B. (2005): 'Steeds minder mensen zeggen u'. Reportage. Taalschrift juni/juli 2005, p. 1–5.
[8] TOORN, M.C. van den. (1977): 'De problematiek van de Nederlandse aanspreekvormen'. Nieuwe Taalgids 70. p. 520–540.
[9] VERMAAS, J.A.M. (2002): Veranderingen in de Nederlandse aanspreekvormen van de dertiende t/m de twintigste eeuw. Utrecht: LOT.
[10] VISMANS, R. (2013): 'Address Choice in Dutch 1: Variation and the Role of Domain'. Dutch Crossing. A Journal of Low Countries Studies 37.2. p. 163–187. | DOI 10.1179/0309656413Z.00000000035
[2] CLYNE, M. (2009): Language and Human Relations. Styles of Address in Contemporary Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[3] FISHMAN, J. (1972): 'Domains and the Relationship between Micro- and Macrosociolinguistics'. Directions in Sociolinguistics. The Ethnography of Communication. ed. by John J. Gumperz and Dell Hymes. Oxford: Blackwell, p. 435–53.
[4] KUIKEN, F. (2011): '(Vreemde)taalverwerving en de contrastieve aanpak'. N/F – Association des Néerlandistes de Belgique francophone, Vol. 10, p. 13–26.
[5] ŁAŻIŃSKI, M. (2006): O panach i paniach, polskie rzeczowniki tytularne i ich asymetria rodzajopłciowa. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
[6] MARCJANIK, M. (2008): Grzeczność w komunikacji językowej. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Warszawa.
[7] SALEMANS, B. (2005): 'Steeds minder mensen zeggen u'. Reportage. Taalschrift juni/juli 2005, p. 1–5.
[8] TOORN, M.C. van den. (1977): 'De problematiek van de Nederlandse aanspreekvormen'. Nieuwe Taalgids 70. p. 520–540.
[9] VERMAAS, J.A.M. (2002): Veranderingen in de Nederlandse aanspreekvormen van de dertiende t/m de twintigste eeuw. Utrecht: LOT.
[10] VISMANS, R. (2013): 'Address Choice in Dutch 1: Variation and the Role of Domain'. Dutch Crossing. A Journal of Low Countries Studies 37.2. p. 163–187. | DOI 10.1179/0309656413Z.00000000035