Written by Dyami Millarson

In the Frisian-speaking region that is associated with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the term Frysk Frisian is commonly used to describe the language spoken in the area, without specifying which type of Frisian is being referred to. However, as there are multiple Frisian languages, there is a need for a more specific terminology to describe the type of Frisian being spoken.

In the past, the term Lânfrysk Land Frisian was used to describe the Frisian spoken on the mainland in the Netherlands. However, this term has proven to be unsatisfactory, as it is unclear what is meant by lân and may even be misinterpreted as national. In addition, there is a need for a term that asserts a Frisian linguistic identity separately from the Frisian linguistic identities of Hindeloopen, Schiermonnikoog, and Terschelling.

The search for a suitable terminology that encapsulates the particular type of Frisian identity has become an important cultural and linguistic issue. With the growing awareness that there are multiple Frisian languages spoken in the Frisian indigenous region that is associated with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, there arose a need to develop a term that not only identifies the type of Frisian being spoken but also reflects the cultural and linguistic characteristics of the language.

One convention is to use the term Wâldfrysk Forest Frisian to describe the Frisian spoken in the forests of the region. This term is not only specific but also reflects the cultural and linguistic features of the language spoken in the area. One confusing convention is to use the term Stêdfrysk City Frisian to describe the Frisian spoken in the cities of the region. This term reflects the cultural and linguistic characteristics of the languages spoken in urban areas. However, rather counterintuitively, these languages are not Frisian but Hollandic with Frisian characteristics.

The search for a suitable terminology to describe the type of Frisian being spoken has become a matter of cultural and linguistic identity. The term used should not only be specific but also reflect the cultural and linguistic characteristics of the language spoken in the region.

In this context, I coined the term Geafrysk or Shire Frisian. This term expresses a linguistic identity that is separate from the Frisian languages spoken in Hindeloopen, Terschelling, and Schiermonnikoog, and it is a term that has satisfied the sentiment of a specific type of Frisian identity separate from all others of the region that was previously difficult to express.

Shire Frisian includes Wood Frisian and Clay Frisian, which are subcategories of the linguistic identity group which I may also call Wood-Clay Frisian. There are Wood Frisians who regard themselves as speaking their eigen taal own language, and so we may also regard Shire Frisian as a construct which consists of the Wood Frisian and Clay Frisian languages. There has additionally been some ambiguity regarding whether Súdwesthoeksk Southwest Corner Frisian is included in this Shire Frisian category. While Southwest Corner Frisian is more closely related to Wood-Clay Frisian, it has been treated as included in the Shire Frisian category at times.

The written standard of the Shire Frisian languages, deliberately excludes Southwest Corner Frisian forms. This exclusion reflects the desire to develop a standard written language that is based on a specific linguistic identity, namely Shire Frisian, that is separate from Southwest Corner Frisian.

The development of a standard written language based on Shire Frisian reflects the importance of maintaining the cultural and linguistic identity of the Frisian people. The use of a specific terminology to describe the Frisian language spoken in the region ensures that the language is accurately identified and celebrated.

Southwest Corner Frisians are a linguistic-cultural group on the mainland who are often regarded as excluded and rejected. They may be considered a “disadvantaged group” on several accounts, including their underrepresentation in writing. As mentioned earlier, this exclusion is reflected in the written standard of Geafrysk, which deliberately excludes Southwest Corner Frisian forms.

Despite this exclusion, Joël Hut, a Southwest Corner Frisian writer, has made significant efforts to write in the Southwest Corner Frisian language. However, an analysis of his written Southwest Corner Frisian shows that it is too divergent from the Wood-Clay Frisian written norm, which is the basis of the Geafrysk language. Although it exhibits features resembling Wood-Clay Frisian, it also has distinct linguistic traits that make its inclusion in the same group as Wood-Clay Frisian dubious at best.

The linguistic question of where to place Southwest Corner Frisian is solved by regarding it as a separate category from Shire Frisian. While it has assimilated a great deal with Wood-Clay Frisian, it also exhibits unique linguistic features that set it apart from the other Frisian languages. As such, its exclusion from the written standard of Geafrysk raises important questions about cultural and linguistic identity.

The underrepresentation of Southwest Corner Frisians in writing is just one example of the challenges faced by this linguistic-cultural group. Despite the difficulties they face, Southwest Corner Frisians continue to assert their cultural and linguistic identity. This is evident in the efforts made by writers like Joël Hut to preserve and promote the Southwest Corner Frisian language.

So, let me briefly summarise the main points of this article:

• The Frisian language is not homogeneous, and there are multiple language spoken in the region, including Wood and Clay Frisian, Southwest Corner Frisian, East and West Terschelling Frisian, Hindeloopen Frisian, and Schiermonnikoog Frisian.
• Southwest Corner Frisians are often excluded and underrepresented in writing due to their unique linguistic features.
• The efforts of Southwest Corner Frisian writers, such as Joël Hut, to preserve and promote the language demonstrate the importance of maintaining linguistic and cultural diversity.
• It is important to recognise and celebrate the linguistic diversity of the Frisian region and ensure that all linguistic-cultural groups are represented and given a platform to express their unique linguistic identity.