English and Dutch terms in Belgian Dutch soccer reporting: a mixed-methods approach

Abstract

ABSTRACT English is no doubt the language of soccer. At the same time, many countries have over the past century introduced heritage alternatives for English soccer terminology. This paper aims to better understand the resulting choices that need to be made between sports terminology borrowed from English (e.g. keeper) and heritage alternatives (e.g. Dutch doelman). Two studies on Belgian Dutch mass media soccer reporting are presented. Study 1 charts the frequencies of English words and heritage alternatives for 20 soccer concepts in three genres for 38 journalists, revealing a highly variable presence of English. Study 2 reports on a thematic analysis of semi-structured expert interviews asking three journalists to reflect on the position of English terminology in (their own) reporting. Though study 1 reveals a dispersed pattern, the interviewees in study 2 report they do not see a need for more uniform practices or top-down language policies. At the same time, they believe that commentators, pundits, and journalists should adapt usage patterns. Overall, the results of our innovative mixed-methods approach allow us to better understand how the language of soccer has been and is being shaped through the interaction of the individual and the collective, the local and the global.