Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

Choose an application

• Reference Manager
• EndNote
• RefWorks (Direct export to RefWorks)

As Leblicq finished his thesis in 2021 on cultural differences in Dutch and English grammars, in which he compares the oldest with the current Dutch grammar, he mentions the novelty of the subject he examined. He also proposes follow-up research in which the results he found are compared to an intermediate grammar, which is partly what this study does, as two intermediate grammars will be compared to those Leblicq examined. However, this paper does not focus on cultural differences, but on the terminology used in those grammars. Four different grammars were used in this study, each published in a different century. Twe-spraack by Spiegel, seen as the first Dutch grammar, dates from the late sixteenth century. Nieuwe Nederduytsche Spraak-konst by Des Roches dates from the middle of the eighteenth century, while the first edition of Nederlandsche Spraakkunst by Den Hertog was published at the end of the nineteenth century, which was edited and republished a decade later. Lastly, the second edition of Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst (ANS) was published at the end of the twentieth century. All grammars were analysed and compared in this paper, with a focus on the terminology the grammars used when describing spelling, word classes and syntactic functions. The overall structure of the grammars was also investigated, as well as the classifications that were used, mostly in the chapters on word classes and syntactic functions. The results show a division between the two older and the two more modern grammars. On the one hand, when comparing the terminology used in the two older grammars, the observation can be made that they consistently choose either Dutch or Latin in most cases. They do however mention the corresponding term in the other language at least once. The difference between both grammars is that Spiegel uses Dutch, probably because of his purist motives, while Des Roches opts for Latin. The latter preferred French over his native language, especially in the later stages of his life, which may have caused his choice for the terminology of a Romance language. The Dutch terminology both grammars propose is often similar. Additionally, the general structure of the grammars and the given classifications are also comparable. On the other hand, neither of the two modern grammars use one or the other language consistently. Instead, the terms that are used are those that are most widely known by the public, at least in the ANS, which are also used in school grammars. The same reasoning may also hold true for Den Hertog, who wrote his grammar as a tool for educational purposes, as it is seen as the precursor of the ANS and because they share the use of Latin terminology in the same cases. The Dutch terminology used in both grammars coincides mostly, not taking in regard some spelling changes. The overall composition is different, as Den Hertog starts out with syntax and ends with word classes, while the ANS inverts that structure. In that regard, ANS shares its composition with the two older grammars. The classifications of the word classes differ from the older grammars, given that numerals are counted as a word class in the newer grammars, but not in the older, or inversely, a participle is seen as a word class in the older grammars, but not in the newer.