oa Hebben we oren naar anderstaligen in het Vlaamse hoger onderwijs?

References

1. Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Ball, P. & H.Giles (1982). Speech style and employment selection: The matched-guise technique. In: G. M.Breakwell, H.Foot & R.Gilmour (red.), Social psychology: A practical manual. Londen: Macmillan, 101-122.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Barr, D. J., R.Levy, C.Scheepers & H.J.Tily (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of memory and language68, 255-278.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Barton, K. (2020). MuMIn: Multi-Model Inference. R package version 1.43.17. <https://CRAN.Rproject.org/package=MuMIn>
   [Google Scholar]
5. Bates, D., M.Maechler, B.Bolker & S.Walker (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software67, 1-48.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Boyd, S. (2003). Foreign-born teachers in the multilingual classroom in Sweden: The role of attitudes to foreign accent. International journal of bilingual education and bilingualism6, 283-295.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bree, Van, C. (1988). Oordelen van standaardtaal-, dialect- en sociolectspreker over standaardtaalvariëteiten, dialecten en sociolecten. Leuvense bijdragen77, 1-42.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Brennan, E. M. & J. S.Brennan (1981). Accent scaling and language attitudes: Reactions to Mexican American English speech. Languageandspeech24, 207-221.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Cuvelier, P. (2007). Standaardnederlands, tussentaal en dialect in Antwerpen. De perceptie van jonge moedertaalsprekers en taalleerders. In: D.Sandra, R.Rymenans, P.Cuvelier & P.Van Petegem (red.), Tussen taal, spelling en onderwijs. Essays bij het emeritaat van Frans Daems. Gent: Academia Press, 39-58.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Deprez, K. & Y.Persoons (1984). On the ethnolinguistic identity of Flemish high school students in Brussels. Journal of language and social psychology3, 273-296.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Dewaele, J.-M.(2018). Why the Dichotomy ‘L1 Versus LX User’ is Better than ‘Native Versus Non-native Speaker’. Applied Linguistics39, 236-240.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Deygers, B. & M.Malone (2019). Language assessment literacy in university admission policies, or the dialogue that isn’t. Language testing36, 347-368.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Deygers, B., K.Van den Branden & K.Van Gorp (2018a). University entrance language tests : A matter of justice. Language testing35, 449-476.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Deygers, B., B.Zeidler, D.Vilcu & C.Carlsen (2018b). One framework to unite them all? Use of the CEFR in European university entrance policies. Language assessment quarterly: Languagetests for academicenrolmentandthe CEFR15, 3-15.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Doeleman, R. (1998). Native reactions in non-native speech (Studies in multilingualism. Vol. 13). Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Dragojevic, M., H.Giles, A.-C.Beck & N. T.Tatum (2017). The fluency principle: Why foreign accent strength negatively biases language attitudes. Communication monographs84, 385-405.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Edwards, J. (1982). Language attitudes and their implications among English speakers. In: E. B.Ryan & H.Giles (red.), Attitudes toward language variation: Social and applied contexts. London: Edward Arnold, 20-33.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Foulkes, P. (2010). Exploring social-indexical knowledge: A long past but a short history. Laboratory phonology1, 5-39.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Fox.J. (2003). Effect Displays in R for Generalised Linear Models. Journal of Statistical Software8, 1-27.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Fox, J. & S.Weisberg (2019). An RCompanionto Applied Regression (3de ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Fuertes, J. N., W.Gottdiener, H.Martin, T.C.Gilbert & H.Giles (2012). A meta-analysis of the effects of speakers’ accents on interpersonal evaluations. European journal of social psychology42, 120-133.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Garrett, P. (2010). Attitudes to language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Giles, H. (1970). Evaluative reactions to accents. Educational review22, 211-227.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Gluszek, A. & J.F.Dovidio (2010). The way they speak: A social psychological perspective on the stigma of non-native accents in communication. Personality and social psychology review14, 214-237.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Grondelaers, S., P.van Gent & R.van Hout (2015). Is Moroccan-flavoured Standard Dutch standard or not? On the use of perceptual criteria to determine the limits of standard languages. In: A.Prikhodkine & D. R.Preston (red.), Responsestolanguage varieties: Variability, processes and outcomes. Amsterdam: Benjamins, 191-218.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Grondelaers, S., R.van Hout & P.van Gent (2016). Destandardization is not destandardization. Revising standardness criteria in order to revisit standard language typologies in the Low Countries. Taal en tongval68, 119-149.
    [Google Scholar]
27. Grondelaers, S. & P.van Gent (2019). How “deep” is Dynamism? Revisiting the evaluation of Moroccan-flavored Netherlandic Dutch. Linguistics vanguard5, 20180011.
    [Google Scholar]
28. GrondelaersS, D.Speelman, C.Lybaert & P.van Gent (2020). Getting a (big) data- based grip on ideological change. Evidence from Belgian Dutch. Journal of linguistic geography8, 49-65.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Hendriks, B., F.van Meurs & E.de Groot (2017). The effects of degrees of Dutch accentedness in ELF and in French, German and Spanish. International journal of applied linguistics27, 44-66.
    [Google Scholar]
30. Hendriks, B., F.van Meurs, A.-K.Reimer (2018). The evaluation of lecturers’ non-native-accented English: Dutch and German students’ evaluations of different degrees of Dutch-accented and German-accented English of lecturers in higher education. Journal of English for academic purposes34, 28-45.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Hosoda, M., E.Stone-Romero & J.Walter (2007). Listeners’ Cognitive and Affective Reactions to English Speakers with Standard American English and Asian Accents. Perceptual and motor skills104, 307-326.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Hosoda, M. & E.Stone-Romero (2010). The effects of foreign accents on employment- related decisions. Journal of managerial psychology25, 113-132.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Jacobs, C., S.Marzo & E.Zenner (2021). Sociale betekenis en taalvariatie in luisterverhalen voor Vlaamse kinderen. Nederlandse taalkunde26, 79-120.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Jongenburger, W. (2002). Taal is macht. Over taalattitudes in de multiculturele samenleving. In: H.Bennis, G.Extra, P.Muysken & J.Nortier (red.), Een buurt in beweging. Talen en culturen in het Utrechtse Lombok en Transvaal. Amsterdam: Aksant, 141-154.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Lambert, W. E., R.C.Hodgson, R.C.Gardner & S.Fillenbaum (1960). Evaluational reactions to spoken languages. The journal of abnormal and social psychology60, 44-51.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Lenth, R. (2019). emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means. R package version 1.3.5.1. <https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans>
    [Google Scholar]
37. Lev-Ari, S. & B.Keysar (2010). Why don’t we believe non-native speakers? The influence of accent on credibility. Journal of experimental social psychology46, 1093-1096.
    [Google Scholar]
38. Lindemann, S. (2003). Koreans, Chinese or Indians? Attitudes and ideologies about non-native English speakers in the United States. Journal of sociolinguistics7, 348-364.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Lindemann, S. (2005). Who speaks “broken English”? U.S. undergraduates’ perceptions of non-native English. International journal of applied linguistics15, 187-212.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Lippi-Green, R. (1994). Standard language ideology, and discriminatory pretext in the courts. Language in society23, 163-198.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Lippi-Green, R. (2012). English with an accent (2de ed.). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Lüdecke, D. (2018). ggeffects: Tidy Data Frames of Marginal Effects from Regression Models. Journal of Open Source Software3, 772.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Marzo, S. (2015). Exploring the social meaning of contemporary urban vernaculars: Perceptions and attitudes about Citetaal in Flanders. International journal of bilingualism20, 501-521.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Mettewie, L. & R.Janssens (2007). Language use and language attitudes in Brussels. In: D.Lasagabaster & Á.Huguet (red.), Multilingualism in European bilingual contexts: Language use and attitudes. Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 117-251.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Nederlandse Taalunie (2018). Gemeenschappelijk Europees referentiekader voor moderne vreemde talen: leren, onderwijzen, beoordelen. Supplement met nieuwe descriptoren. Den Haag: Nederlandse Taalunie.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Nejjari, W., M.Gerritsen, M.Van Der Haagen & H.Korzilius. (2012). Responses to Dutch-accented English. World Englishes31, 248-267.
    [Google Scholar]
47. NejjariW, M.Gerritsen, R.van Hout & B.Planken (2020). Where does a ‘foreign’ accent matter? German, Spanish and Singaporean listeners’ reactions to Dutch-accented English, and standard British and American English accents. PLoS ONE15, e0231089.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Nortier, J. & M.Dorleijn (2008). A Moroccan accent in Dutch: A sociocultural style restricted to the Moroccan community?International journal of bilingualism12, 125-142.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Pantos, A. J. & A.W.Perkins (2012). Measuring implicit and explicit attitudes toward foreign accented speech. Journal of language and social psychology32, 3-20.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Purnell, T., W.Idsardi & J.Baugh (1999). Perceptual and phonetic experiments on American English dialect identification. Journal of language and social psychology18, 10-30.
    [Google Scholar]
51. R Core Team (2019). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, <https://www.R-project.org>.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Revelle, W. (2019) psych: Procedures for Personality and Psychological Research. R package version 1.9.12, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych.
    [Google Scholar]
53. Rosseel, L., D.Speelman & D.Geeraerts (2019). The relational responding task (RRT): A novel approach to measuring social meaning of language variation. Linguistics vanguard5, 20180012.
    [Google Scholar]
54. Ryan, E. B., M.A.Carranza & R.W.Moff ie (1977). Reactions toward varying degrees of accentedness in the speech of Spanish-English bilinguals. Language and speech20, 267-273.
    [Google Scholar]
55. Squires, L. (2013). It don’t go both ways: Limited bidirectionality in sociolinguistic perception. Journal of sociolinguistics17, 200-37.
    [Google Scholar]
56. Todd, W.R. & P.Pojanapunya (2009). Implicit attitudes towards native and non-native speaker teachers. System37, 23-33.
    [Google Scholar]
57. Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. New York: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
58. Wickham, H., R.François, L.Henry & K.lMüller (2019). dplyr: AGrammarof Data Manipulation. R package version 0.8.3, <https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=dplyr>.
    [Google Scholar]