In this article, we examine and compare the main human impersonal pronouns in Afrikaans, Dutch and English. The
second person singular, the third person plural and the ‘man’- and ‘one’-pronouns are studied by means of an acceptability
judgment questionnaire and a completion questionnaire. The combination of the two methods reveals interesting descriptive facts
about the three West Germanic languages. They include, among other things, the ‘man’-prominence of Afrikaans versus the
‘you’-prominence of Dutch and English for expressing the universal meaning ‘anyone’ and the more prominent position of ‘they’ in
Dutch than in the other languages for conveying the existential meaning ‘someone, some people’. Our findings have a number of more
theoretical implications too. The two existing semantic maps for human impersonal pronouns make different distinctions in the
existential domain, based on type/level of (un)knownness on the one hand and number on the other. Our study tests both sets of
distinctions and shows that the two dimensions interact with each other in Afrikaans, Dutch and English. The results thus support
a recent proposal in the literature for a combined semantic map. The data from the completion questionnaire, finally, also
indicates that existential uses prefer alternative forms of impersonalization to human impersonal pronouns in all three
languages.
Donaldson, Bruce C.1993. A Grammar of Afrikaans. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Duinhoven, A. M.1990. Verdwijnt men? [Is men disappearing?] In Hans den Besten, A. M. Duinhoven & Jan P. A. Stroop (eds.), Vragende wijs: Vragen over tekst, taal en taalgeschiedenis [Interrogative mood: Questions about tekst, language and language history], 70–80. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Fonesca-Greber, Bonnie & Linda R. Waugh. 2003. On the radical difference between the subject personal pronouns in written and spoken European French. In Pepi Leistyna & Charles F. Meyer (eds.), Corpus analysis: Language structure and language use, 225–240. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Gast, Volker. 2017. Online database for a typology of human impersonal pronouns. [URL] (4July, 2017.)
Gast, Volker, Lisa Deringer, Florian Haas & Olga Rudolf. 2015. Impersonal uses of the second person singular: A pragmatic analysis of generalization and empathy effects. Journal of Pragmatics 881. 148–162.
Gast, Volker & Johan van der Auwera. 2013. Towards a distributional typology of human impersonal pronouns, based on data from European languages. In Dik Bakker & Martin Haspelmath (eds.), Languages across boundaries: Studies in the memory of Anna Siewierska, 119–158. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Greenbaum, Sidney & Randolph Quirk. 1970. Elicitation experiments in English: Linguistic studies in use and attitude. London: Longman.
Hoekstra, Jarich. 2010. On the impersonal pronoun men in Modern West Frisian. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 13(1). 31–59.
Hofmeister, Philip, T. Florian Jaeger, Ivan Sag, Inbal Arnon & Neal Snider. 2007. Locality and accessibility in wh-questions. In Sam Featherston & Wolfgang Sternefeld (eds.), Roots: Linguistics in search of its evidential base, 185–206. Berlin: De Gruyter.
IBM Corp.2013. IBM SPSS statistics for Windows: Version 22.0. Armonk: IBM Corp.
Kirsten, Johanita. 2016. Grammatikale verandering in Afrikaans van 1911–2010 [Grammatical change in Afrikaans from 1991–2010]. Vanderbijlpark: North-West University dissertation.
Malamud, Sophia A.2013. (In)definiteness-driven typology of arbitrary items. Lingua 1261. 1–31.
Posio, Pekka & Maria Vilkuna. 2013. Referential dimensions of human impersonals in dialectal European Portuguese and Finnish. Linguistics 51(1). 177–229.
Rasinger, Sebastian M.2013. Quantitative research in linguistics: An introduction. London: Bloomsbury.
Siewierska, Anna. 2004. Person. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Siewierska, Anna & Maria Papastathi. 2011. Towards a typology of third personal plural impersonals. Linguistics 49(3). 575–610.
Sprouse, Jon & Diogo Almeida. 2012. Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger’s Core Syntax. Journal of Linguistics 48(3). 609–652.
van der Auwera, Johan. 2011. Standard Average European. In Bernd Kortmann & Johan van der Auwera (eds.), The languages and linguistics of Europe: A comprehensive guide, 291–306. Berlin: De Gruyter.
van der Auwera, Johan, Volker Gast & Jeroen Vanderbiesen. 2012. Human impersonal pronoun uses in English, Dutch and German. Leuvense Bijdragen 981. 27–64.
van der Auwera, Johan & Vladimir A. Plungian. 1998. Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology 2(1). 79–124.
Van Olmen, Daniël & Adri Breed. 2018. Human impersonal pronouns in Afrikaans: A double questionnaire-based study. Language Sciences 691. 1–29.
Van Olmen, Daniël, Adri Breed & Ben Verhoeven. 2019. A corpus-based study of the human impersonal pronoun (’n) mens in Afrikaans: Compared to men and een mens in Dutch. Languages in Contrast19(1). 79–105.
Weerman, Fred. 2006. It’s the economy, stupid: Een vergelijkende blik op men en man [It’s the economy, stupid: A comparative look at men en man
]. In Matthias Hüning, Ulrike Vogl, Ton van der Wouden & Arie Verhagen (eds.), Nederlands tussen Duits en Engels [Dutch between German and English], 19–47. Leiden: Stichting Neerlandistiek Leiden.
Zifonun, Gisela. 2001. Man lebt nur einmal: Morphosyntax und Semantik des Pronomens man. Deutsche Sprache 28(3). 232–253.
2021. Developing and validating a visual questionnaire for the study of impersonalisation strategies: A design thinking approach. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 39:2 ► pp. 152 ff.
Breed, Adri & Daniël Van Olmen
2021. The Passive as an Impersonalisation Strategy in Afrikaans and Dutch: A Corpus Investigation. Dutch Crossing 45:2 ► pp. 171 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.