# Common Dutch



## Frank06

*Split off from this thread.
Frank, moderator DF*

Hi,


_Elanor_ said:


> ^^ Well, I don't speak a dialect


Come again?

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## _Elanor_

^^ thank you! Well, I just speak normal ABN, which is not considered a dialect but is just common Dutch without an accent.


----------



## Grytolle

_Elanor_ said:


> ^^ thank you! Well, I just speak normal ABN, which is not considered a dialect but is just common Dutch without an accent.


You mean it's not possible to at all hear where in the Dutch speaking area you are from? :O


----------



## Frank06

Hi,


_Elanor_ said:


> ^^ thank you! Well, I just speak normal ABN, which is not considered a dialect but is just common Dutch without an accent.


Any linguist, dialectologist would disagree with this kind of statements. ABN (as any standard language) is considered to be a dialect.

And what do you mean by "normal Dutch" and "common Dutch without an accent"? Is there something as "abnormal Dutch"? And how common is "common"? Does it also mean that I wouldn't be able to hear from the first common word you say that you're either from Flanders or from the Netherlands.
I doubt it...

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Grytolle

Frank, I think you might be using "dialect" instead of "variety" (aannemend dat dat de Engelse vertaling van "variëteit" is).

All the language forms are varieties of Dutch; the two versions of het Standaardnederlands are the ones currently enjoying the most prestige.

ABN-pronounciation, ABN being a term of the past, would mean you pronounce everything like the "civilized people" did when it was defined... The closest you come to that is probably the way newsreaders speak at the VRT.


----------



## Frank06

Grytolle said:


> Frank, I think you might be using "dialect" instead of "variety" (aannemend dat dat de Engelse vertaling van "variëteit" is).


Yeah, indeed. Since this is a language forum, I had myself inspired by Walt Wolfram and I am using the term "dialect" in its technical meaning, which goes far beyond the idea of a _regional _variety.
Just to give one quote (from his book _American English, _though the subtitle is more important here: _Dialects and variation_): 


> Everyone who speaks a language speaks some dialect of the language; it is not possible to speak a language without speaking a dialect of the language



The idea of speaking a "language without an accent" is a contradiction.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## _Elanor_

Thanks for clarifying. What I actually meant to say is, that it's not possible to hear from which area in the Netherlands I am from.  Here in The Netherlands, ABN is never seen as a dialect. A variety of Dutch maybe, but the first Dutch was spoken in Holland, wasn't it (I know Belgium was a part of Holland)? So isn't Vlaams a variety of Dutch instead of both Vlaams AND ABN?


----------



## FlorisEnsink

Oeioeioei, dat zijn uitspraken waar je gedonder mee gaat krijgen. 

You mix up Holland, The Netherlands and the entire area in which Dutch is being spoken all together. I have lived in several parts of the Netherlands and I know that in Utrecht and Zeeland, maybe in parts of Gelderland, you can mix up the Netherlands with Holland. But trust me, in Frisia, Noord-Brabant, Overijssel or any part of the country farther from 'Holland' than Amersfoort, Holland is considered to be confined to just two provinces. And the varieties of Dutch that are being spoken there, including what is called 'ABN', are considdered to be dialects. 
I'll leave it to the Flemmish to let you know what they think about it. 

It seems to me impossible to identify when and where the first Dutch was being spoken, but the phrase that is generally seen as the first written text in Dutch looks like this: _Hebban olla vogala nestas hagunnan hinase hic anda thu.
_Don't tell me you think it looks like the ABN of Holland.


----------



## moldo

_Elanor_ said:


> Thanks for clarifying. What I actually meant to say is, that it's not possible to hear from which area in the Netherlands I am from.  Here in Holland, ABN is never seen as a dialect. A variety of Dutch maybe, but the first Dutch was spoken in Holland, wasn't it (I know Belgium was a part of Holland)? So isn't Vlaams a variety of Dutch instead of both Vlaams AND ABN?


 
Daar ben ik het helemaal mee eens. ABN is geen dialect. Fries ook niet, dat is een taal.
Bijvoorbeeld, zoals de Volendammers onderling spreken, dat is dialect. Daar begrijp je niks van als buitenstaander.


----------



## Frank06

Hoi,



FlorisEnsink said:


> Oeioeioei, dat zijn uitspraken waar je gedonder mee gaat krijgen.






moldo said:


> Daar ben ik het helemaal mee eens. ABN is geen dialect. Fries ook niet, dat is een taal.





_Elanor_ said:


> Here in Holland, ABN is never seen as a dialect.


Door wie niet? Niet door de meerderheid van de sprekers van dat bepaalde dialect die helaas maar een heel vaag idee hebben wat de technische betekenis van de term _dialect_ inhoud?

Ik wil echt niet nog maar eens het pseudo-debat "dialect versus taal" houden, maar zoals gezegd, gebruikte ik de term _dialect_ in zijn technische, taalkundige betekenis. En die technische betekenis verschilt _enorm_ van het - laat ons zeggen - dagelijkse, niet-technische gebruik van het woordje dialect. Om dit te illustreren gaf ik een citaatje uit een werkje van een van de meest vooraanstaande Amerikaanse dialectologen. Ik dacht dat dit wel kon op een taalforum... 
Maar dit  technisch gebruik heeft zo te zien weinig of niets te maken met wat men daar in het algemeen in Holland (of in Vlaanderen) over denkt.



> A variety of Dutch maybe, but the first Dutch was spoken in Holland, wasn't it (I know Belgium was a part of Holland)?


Van 1815 tot 1830, hoewel technisch gezien België voor 1830 niet bestond... Ik vermoed echter dat men voor die periode al Nederlands sprak. 

Maar hoe ga je bepalen waar het eerste Nederlands _gesproken_ werd? Hoe ga je bepalen wat het "eerste Nederlands" is? Aan de hand van geschreven _teksten_?  
Een van de collecties van vroeg(st)e "Nederlandse" _teksten_ wordt in Duitsland beschouwd als een verzameling Duitse teksten (Hendrik van Veldeke / Heinrich von Veldeke). Tja. 
Veel succes.



> So isn't Vlaams a variety of Dutch instead of both Vlaams AND ABN?


We gaan toch wéér niet over die andere pseudo-discussie "Vlaams versus(?) Nederlands" beginnen?? Daar zijn al genoeg discussies over gevoerd. Ik stel voor dat je eerst dit, dit en dit leest.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## _Elanor_

FlorisEnsink said:


> But trust me, in Frisia, Noord-Brabant, Overijssel or any part of the country farther from 'Holland' than Amersfoort, Holland is considered to be confined to just two provinces.


 
I meant the Netherlands and not Holland. It's just an easier way of writing.

I have lived in Enschede all my life and I have never heard anyone saying "Holland? You mean THE NETHERLANDS". Everyone uses it as a shorter version of Nederland. Even here among de Tukkers.



> Well, I don't speak a dialect.





Frank06 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Come again?
> 
> Groetjes,
> 
> Frank


 


> What surprises me is that anno 2008 some people still seem to be unaware or surprised that there are* two kinds of Dutch standard languages*, or that *Standard Dutch* has two focal points, the one that can be heard in the Netherlands and the one that can be heard in Flanders.


I don't get it Frank. You say that I'm wrong when I say that ABN is Standard Dutch or no dialect and yet you say here that are two types of Standard Dutch, which is exactly what I meant as well. I speak standard Dutch (also called ABN). What I mean with dialect is the varieties of Standard Dutch spoken in certain regions (Amsterdams, Rotterdams, Twents, etc.).


----------

