The use of Limburgish as a language of government gradually ceased in the 17th and 18th centuries, due to the increasing political fragmentation of Limburg and the growing influence of various rulers on Limburgish territories. Around 1800, Limburgish was spoken by most Limburgers in both West and East Limburg. Limburgish was also written, albeit to a lesser extent. One of the few examples of written Limburgish from this time comes from Heerlen, in the form of a fragment of a notebook kept by Mr Andries Hoenen, who was born in 1760 and came from Heerlerheide.
Around 1800, the preferred written and often spoken languages of administration and the judiciary, as well as for communication with government, were those that had been introduced by foreign rulers in Limburg in the 17th and 18th centuries and which facilitated their administration; these were French, Dutch and German.
The Prince-Bishop of Liège used French as the language of government. In addition to being Joint Lord of Maastricht, he also ruled over the County of Horn, as well as the County of Loon, which occupied a large part of West Limburg.
During this time, Dutch was used as the official language of administration by Dutch civil servants in those territories of East Limburg that came under control of the Republic. These territories consisted mainly of that part of Maastricht which was governed by the Republic, as well as half of the Lands of Outremeuse, consisting of a part of the County of Daelhem, the Seigniory of ‘s Hertogenrade and the County of Valkenburg. Dutch was also introduced in the Upper Quarter of Guelders of the States, including Venlo, Stevensweert and Ambt Montfort, but with the exclusion of Swalmen and Elmp.
During Austrian rule French replaced Limburgish as the official language of government. As a consequence, the inhabitants of Roermond, Weert and the other half of the Lands of Outremeuse, and in particular Daelhem, ‘s Hertogenrade and Valkenburg, now faced a French-speaking government.
The King of Prussia controlled the German Upper Quarter of Guelders, which comprised the largest part of East Limburg situated to the north and included such places as Venray and Horst. In these areas, German replaced Limburgish as the language of government. From 1555 onwards, Sittard was one of the first places in this area where the written tradition of Middle Limburgish was replaced by that of High German.

During their rule from 1794 to 1814, the French viewed their way of life, laws and language as superior. The Limburgish population was confronted with a French language policy that was intolerant of all minority languages. This policy was a continuation of the French endeavour to replace anything that could be seen as patois in their eyes – whether Provençal, Breton, Catalan or Basque – with the glorious language of Racine and Voltaire. A strict ‘Frenchification’ policy was implemented, which prescribed that French was the only official language to be used for all government documents. From 1794 onwards, civil courts were obliged to conduct all proceedings in French only. Moreover, all official documents had to be prepared in French from 1803 onwards. However, the introduction of French in primary education encountered a number of difficulties. At this time, primary education was not available to the whole population. An estimated 50 percent of all men and 70 percent of all women were illiterate, with illiteracy somewhat lower in the cities, and higher in rural areas.
From 1803 onwards, the French language policy became less strict. In addition to French, it was also permissible to use Flemish as an administrative language. One reason this was allowed to happen was that many civil servants had no command of French. In this regard, it should be clear that ‘Flemish’ does not refer to one single standardised language, but rather to West Germanic dialects that were spoken in the southern part of the Low Countries, including the dialects of Limburgish. In addition to French, the Department of the Roer also permitted the use of German as a language of government.
In any case, little resistance was encountered in response to the linguistic measures introduced by the French, since the upper classes of society had already been strongly influenced by the French and the lower classes were seen as politically insignificant. French had already become a prominent language prior to 1794. Before the French occupation, fashion and theatre were already focused on Paris. Many Limburgers were also strongly influenced by nearby Wallonia, particularly in West Limburg, which had been under the control of the Prince-Bishop of Liège for centuries, along with other parts in the centre and the south of East Limburg. Newspapers published in Liège were very popular in these parts of Limburg. From 1810 onwards during the French era, only one newspaper was allowed to appear in each department, but bilingual editions were permitted for non-French-speaking departments. Nevertheless, a French-only newspaper was published in Maastricht. In addition, plays were performed solely in French, as they had been prior to the French occupation.

After sovereignty over Limburg passed from the French to the Dutch, William I announced that Dutch was to be regarded as the national language of the southern Low Countries. In his typical authoritarian style, the Dutch King imposed the use of Dutch as the language of government. This decision was based on two connected expressions. The first had its origins in the French revolution: Ein Staot, Ein Spraok – one nation, one language. The second emanated from the German regions: Ein Spraok, Ei Volk – one language, one people.
Shortly after 1815, the Dutch government began to implement measures to introduce Dutch as the official national language to the recently occupied territories in the southern Low Countries. In 1816, various government departments in Maastricht – and probably elsewhere in Limburg as well – felt that Dutch was inadequate and unsophisticated. No one – from the directors to the most junior civil servants – spoke a word of Dutch and everyone refused to register any documents prepared in that language. In 1819 the Language Decree, which was presented as enabling and ensuring linguistic freedom, proclaimed Dutch, once again, as the language of government in Limburg as well as of the Flemish provinces of East and West Flanders and Antwerp. From that time onwards, all official documents were to be written in the Dutch language only. Accordingly, the use of any other language was prohibited, whether Limburgish or, in particular, French, which had been the language of government previously.
The Decree was met with significant resistance by the local population, who did not view Dutch as their own language. Moreover, most civil servants were in fact not capable of carrying out the Decree, due to their lack of command of the Dutch language. In 1817, the Dutch government responded by enforcing its language policy more strictly. Those unable to speak and write Dutch would not be appointed to government positions within Limburg, nor would such persons already in office be eligible for promotion. Those already employed in government service would be transferred or would receive reduced pay until they mastered the Dutch language. The extent to which exceptions initially had to be made in relation to this policy remains unknown. After all, Limburgers did not speak Dutch.
The governor of Limburg at the time, Mr De Brouckère, who had been appointed by the Dutch, was in favour of using Dutch, but was unable to prevent the Limburgish parliament (Provincial States) from using only French. Accordingly, it was not expected that the Limburgish parliament conduct their business in Dutch. In 1830, only three members of the Limburgish parliament were able to adequately express themselves in Dutch. In 1829, despite an express prohibition against the use of any language other than Dutch, the language policy was the topic of extensive debate and a request was sent to King William I to allow linguistic freedom. No such language policy was enforced in the northern Low Countries, so why was the policy applied to the southern Low Countries?
Limburgish politicians were not the only ones who lacked Dutch language skills. In those days, the same applied to senior civil servants. In the early years of the Dutch era in Limburg, no efforts were made by lawyers or public notaries to learn and use Dutch. The junior clergy, who spoke the local vernacular in the south, also objected to the implementation of the Dutch language policy. There was general concern that enforcement of the Dutch language would also imply a stealthy introduction of Calvinism.
Education became an important long-term instrument through which the Dutch government implemented its policy of the ‘Dutchification’ of Limburg. Starting with primary schools, where children were forced to learn Dutch from an early age, and continuing on through the universities, the compulsory use of Dutch this eventually led to successful ‘Dutchification’. In 1817, King William I initially permitted the use of regional languages and only made Dutch, as well as French, compulsory subjects. Nevertheless, the use of Limburgish in classrooms was prohibited in October 1823. Instead, only Dutch was to be used as the language of instruction for all students entering the system. This would ensure that Dutch would be the compulsory language of instruction for all classes within the education system by the school year 1828-1829. Furthermore, a course in Dutch language and literature became a compulsory subject for all students. This process would continue in East Limburg, but due to pressure by parents French was allowed once again as a language of instruction within the East Limburgish educational system. Problems were also encountered in the Limburgish-German border region. German was used as the language of instruction in schools and the Limburgers of this area were strongly in favour of High German. Municipalities would frequently withhold the release of educational funds to teaching staff if they failed to teach High German to their pupils.
This policy of ‘Dutchification’ was problematic throughout Limburg, because there were not enough teachers who knew sufficient Dutch to teach the language in schools. In addition, West Limburg had been part of Liège for years. At that time, Maastricht was the most French city in the southern Low Countries, after Brussels. Moreover, several areas in the eastern parts of East Limburg had been under German rule for many years. As a consequence, Limburg had no firm base upon which Dutch could take root. In addition to legal enforcement, the government in The Hague also considered several positive measures to be necessary. Among these, the free provision of Dutch education materials was particularly successful. Following a lengthy transition period, during which Dutch became the language of formal education, East Limburgers became more familiar with this foreign language.
However, in West Limburg, as a result of the Belgian separation, this process was interrupted. All things Dutch were abolished in the new Belgian state and a policy of ‘Frenchification’ was implemented. Until 1870, the official language in West Limburg, and the language of instruction in the region’s education system, would once again be French. Afterwards, and particularly from World War II onwards, a new policy of ‘Dutchification’ was introduced under the influence of the Vlaamse Beweging, and all inhabitants of the Flemish part of Belgium were obliged to learn Dutch as their standard language. Everything which failed to conform to this standard language, including Limburgish, was marked as uncivilised.
Such language enforcement in both East and West Limburg has continued and is ongoing. The use of Dutch by government departments gradually become established, albeit slightly later in West Limburg. The laws prescribing the use of Dutch as the only language largely remain in place today and do not allow any place for the use of Limburgish – even after the recognition of Limburgish as a separate language in East Limburg in 1997.

Although at first somewhat cautiously, prior to the Belgian separation, but more emphatically after 1840, a positive interest in its own socio-cultural identity emerged in East Limburg. The first sign of this development was the establishment of the drama society Société Dramatique de Ruremonde (‘d’n Dramatiek’) in Roermond in 1838 and the Sociëteit Momus (‘Momus Society’) in Maastricht in 1840. Famous names from those early days in Roermond include those of Charles Guillon and Emile Seipgens, with G.D.L. Franquinet, Laurent Polis and Alfons Olterdissen leading figures in Maastricht.
The two societies were in close contact with one another. The explicit aim of both was to maintain an active use of Limburgish. These cultural organisations helped to drive interest in the language, and members of both societies produced numerous publications in their respective dialects. Moreover, many plays written in Limburgish were performed, even though the use of French was still quite common in the theatre as well. As interest in their own language increased within the Limburgish population, there was a corresponding loss of prestige of French. Indeed, the use of French steadily diminished between 1850 and 1918. As time went on, the use of Dutch became more accepted. Although the Dutch language laws did not have much impact on Limburgish cultural life, Dutch would gradually come to be used more in this regard.
Sociëteit Momus was established by a group of liberal citizens with anti-Dutch sympathies and pro-Belgian-annexation beliefs. Discussions were often fierce and extremely political in nature, and eventually – in order to assure the preservation of the society – this led to a decision to no longer allow any political, religious or personal objectives within Sociëteit Momus. In this regard, the use of Limburgish for political discussions was also prohibited in the Maastricht organisation. Whether this was also the case with d’n Dramatiek remains unknown. Although a political play was written in Limburgish by Mr Emile Seipgens, such plays were the exception rather than the rule.
The Limburgish clergy also contributed to the renewed interest in a Limburgish identity. The seminary, which was based in Rolduc until 1843, provided education in both French and Limburgish. From 1843 onwards, when the seminary moved to St. Truiden, Limburgish seminarians began to receive instruction in Limburgish culture as well.

The renewed interest in their own language was not just expressed in a renaissance of Limburgish literature. Scientific interest was also on the increase. Preparatory work was undertaken in relation to the publication of dictionaries of each local Limburgish dialect. In 1884, Heerlen was the first city to publish a Limburgish-Dutch dictionary, which included chapters on phonology and morphology, Limburgish verb conjugations, proverbs and sayings, as well as historical notes.
At the beginning of the 20th century, Professor Schrijnen and Professor Van Ginneken, along with Mr Verbeeten, the Inspector for Primary Education, gathered materials about the use of Limburgish. Limburgish dictionaries for a large number of local dialects were also compiled, in the main from World War II onwards. In the early 1960s, Professor Weijnen used these materials to begin work on compiling the Woordenboek van de Limburgse Dialecten (WLD – ‘Dictionary of Limburgish Dialects’), which was completed in 2008.

At first, this renaissance was mainly limited to East Limburg. In the 19th and 20th centuries, however, West Limburg was increasingly pulled into the Vlaamse Beweging whose aim was the emancipation of the Flemish and their Flemish dialects in relation to their French-speaking counterparts. The goal of the Vlaamse Beweging required trans-regional collaboration, but West Limburgers preferred to keep a low profile within this movement. This should not come as a big surprise if one recalls that West Limburgers still referred to their regional language as Duits, Duts or Diets around 1850. This was clearly different from how the Dutch and Flemish referred to their own language, namely as Nederduitsch or Nederlands and Vlaams respectively. Apparently, the Dutch and the Flemish felt a kind of linguistic similarity, which the West Limburgish population did not consider itself as sharing in 1850. The Limburgers’ lack of involvement within the Vlaamse Beweging was often viewed with suspicion by the Flemish; this Flemish mistrust hindered the awareness and development of a Limburgish identity amongst West Limburgers. This situation also limited the flourishing of an independent Limburgish written tradition in West Limburg, like the one in East Limburg. Jules Frère from Tongeren was the only person who wrote in the Limburgish of his native town, but this did not happen until the first quarter of the 20th century.

At the end of World War I, the official written language in use, as well as the language of educational instruction, was Dutch. This was particularly so in East Limburg. French was no longer important. Written Limburgish was used for special cultural events and occasions. Furthermore, Limburgish remained the preferred spoken language on a daily basis, in spite of Dutch language policy.

In 1926, in accordance with increased awareness of a separate Limburgish identity, the Vereniging Veldeke (‘Veldeke Society’) was established in East Limburg. The strong influx of Dutch following World War I was one of the reasons for the creation of this society by Dr E. Jaspar and Mr J. van Wessem. The aim of Vereniging Veldeke was the preservation of Limburgish in its spoken and written forms, and and the organisation also intended to establish a uniform orthography, to assist with the writing of the various Limburgish dialects.
Some of the founders of the Vereniging Veldeke, such as Dr E. Jaspar, had waged a pro-Dutch campaign with the anti-secessionists several years earlier. Others, including Mr Jules Schaepkens, Mr Sassen and Mr Kemp, had taken a pro-Belgian stance. During the initial meeting to establish the society, discussions were held about the limits of the geographical scope of the organisation, which was eventually identified as the province of East Limburg, but with a focus towards the Netherlands. This orientation towards the Netherlands and away from Belgium was reinforced through the appointment of Dr Jaspar as second Chair of the Vereniging Veldeke.
In addition, the society tried to ensure that Limburgish would not be used for the expression of anti-Dutch sentiments or other political opinions. Article 2 of the Articles of Association of Vereniging Veldeke from 26 January 1926 explicitly prohibits the use of written Limburgish for spreading political messages. Nevertheless, a political decision regarding the status of the Limburgish language was made from the start. This was best expressed in the slogan eus taol ’t dialek (‘our language the dialect’). On the one hand, this did not deny that Limburgish was a separate language. On the other hand, the term dialek (‘dialect’) was used to refer to Limburgish, making clear the decision that Limburgish, particularly in political and social terms, would occupy a position subsidiary to Dutch.
Initially, regional Veldeke groups emerged only throughout East Limburg.The first Limburgish language association was not established in West Limburg until 1975, when the Vereniging voor Limburgse Dialect- en Naamkunde (‘Organisation for Limburgish Dialectology and Onomastics’) was organised to support the Limburgish language. In 2001, a regional Veldeke group also emerged in West Limburg, which focused on the Limburgish dialects in West Limburg.
The organisational structure of Vereniging Veldeke, as well as the approach used, could already be discerned in the society’s name. Although ‘Veldeke’ refers to the first-known Limburgish author, the complete name of the organisation, in Dutch, is: Voor Elk Limburgs Dialekt Een Krachtige Eenheid (‘A Strong Union For Each Limburgish Dialect’). Initially, each regional Veldeke group focused on its own local version of Limburgish. The aim was to produce dictionaries for each dialect of Limburgish, and for each regional group to concentrate on its own local dialect. The idea was to encourage a kind of local patriotism that would lead to the development of several different and competing written standards for Limburgish; this prevented the development of a single written standard for the Limburgish language.

In 1972, Veldeke Krink Valkeberg, the regional Veldeke group in Valkenburg, organised the first annual mass in the Limburgish language in the Church of Our Lady in Valkenburg. Other places soon followed suit with masses performed in Limburgish. Moreover, Limburgish was adopted as the official language in the world of carnival, and many princely proclamations, invitations, presentations and popular songs are nowadays commonly heard in this language. The Festival of Limburgish Carnival Songs, or ‘t Limbörgs Vastelaovesleedsjesconcour, was established in 1977. Numerous new carnival songs in Limburgish are entered in this competition every year, and the best song is selected to become the major hit of the carnival season.
After 1975, Limburgish received attention in several other areas. An increasing number of studies, initiatives, programmes, projects and publications appeared in relation to the Limburgish language. More and more pop music and songs could be heard in Limburgish: live on stage, in the theatre, on long-playing records, on audiocassettes, CDs, radio and television. Almost every town or village compiled their own dictionary and reprints or revised editions have appeared for several of these. Writing was encouraged through the award of an annual Limburgish literary prize by theVereniging Veldeke. To increase the amount of literature written in Limburgish, the Vereniging Veldeke established a new publisher in Maastricht – TIC – with support from the Province of Limburg. Through the Limburgish Literary List (LiLiLi), the organisation introduces contemporary Limburgish authors to the market. The development of the internet has also seen a continuous increase in the number of websites in Limburgish. There are hundreds of different websites on topics such as carnival, music, language, education, religion, theatre, and culinary subjects, as well as a Limburgish version of Wikipedia.

In 1983, the Vereniging Veldeke launched a Limburgish orthography. In the second half of the 19th century, there had already been significant agreement about a Limburgish orthography. This is evident when one compares works produced by the members of Sociëteit Momus in Maastricht and those of d’n Dramatiek in Roermond. Nevertheless, orthography continued to remain an issue which hindered several collaborations within Limburg. No other subject led to so many quarrels. Even though the Vereniging Veldeke had already accepted several basic rules for a Limburgish orthography in 1926, the first official Veldeke orthography did not appear until 1952; this was the standard for 31 years. In 1983, Mr Jan Notten was invited to formulate a new orthography, which would be used until 2003. In that year, a special committee consisting of Vereniging Veldeke members from throughout Limburg agreed on a revised orthography. This was predominantly a further development of the 1983 orthography, and had the official approval of the Raod veur ’t Limburgs (‘Limburgish Language Council’). The 2003 orthography was prepared in such a way that it is applicable to each dialect of the Limburgish language, thereby supporting the local patriotism of each dialect.

Although many Vereniging Veldeke members supported such local patriotism, other voices could also be heard, even within the organisation. The first call to develop a written standard for Limburgish can be traced back to 1947. By the 1980s, a decrease in the number of Limburgish-speaking people had already been observed, and it was believed that an increase in the prestige of Limburgish would be able to counter this development. In 1986, Mr P. Houben, the Chair, and Mr P. Bakkes, the editor of Veldeke Magazine at the time, argued in favour of a uniform written standard for Limburgish, in order to increase the standing of the language. Emphasis was placed on the written language and it was argued that different Limburgish sounds had to be united under a single letter, to create a uniform written language.
In 1989, the call for a uniform written standard was repeated by a journalist, Mr Wim Kuipers, who worked on this issue with Mr Paul Prikken. Apparently, opposition within the Vereniging Veldeke at the time was too great for such an initiative to proceed. Independently, Mr Prikken published the first general Limburgish dictionary, entitled De taal van de Maas (‘The Language of the Meuse’) in 1994. This Dutch to Limburgish dictionary contains 30,000 Limburgish words, written in a self-devised orthography, which differs from the existing orthography guidelines endorsed by Vereniging Veldeke at the time. Together with Mr Kuipers, Mr Prikken developed plans for a written standard for Limburgish. Accordingly, they founded the working group Algemein Gesjreve Limbörgs (AGL – ‘General Written Limburgish’), which was intended to formulate rules for orthography and to create a dictionary for a standard written Limburgish. AGL based itself on a smaller Limburgish dialect from East Limburg. An online version of this dictionary appeared in 2001.

In a decree dated December 24, 1990, the Belgian Walloon regional government was the first to officially recognise Limburgish, as spoken in West Limburg, as a regional, indigenous language. Earlier calls for recognition had circulated for several decades, predominantly in East Limburg, but no political or legal recognition of Limburgish took place until this decree. For the French-speaking community, Limburgish was part of a linguistic heritage which required protection and support as a means of communication and expression. This led to the foundation of a Conseil des langues régionales endogènes (CLRE –‘Council for Regional Indigenous Languages’), which was to advise the Walloon minister in this regard. In addition, the Walloon government promised to make its voice heard in international organisations for regional languages. However, this recognition was merely symbolic for Limburgish, as no Limburgish was spoken in Wallonia. Those parts of Belgium where Limburgish was spoken, i.e. mainly West Limburg and West Limburgish Voeren, were administered by the Flemish government.

As a result, the Walloons’ recognition preceded East Limburg's request to the Dutch government for recognition of Limburgish as a language. On the first of March 1996, the Werkgroep Erkenning Limburgs als Streektaal (‘Working Group for Recognition of Limburgish as a Regional Language’) prepared the Advies inzake de erkenning van het Limburgs als streektaal (‘Recommendation in relation to the Recognition of Limburgish as a Regional Language’). This working group had been established by Veldeke Limburg at the request of the East Limburgish parliament, to investigate whether Limburgish, similar to Low-Saxon, could be given official recognition under the Council of Europe’s Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. On September 20, 1996, the East Limburgish parliament gave official permission to the Provincial Executive to present the request for recognition to the government in The Hague under Part II of the Charter. In 1997, the request was approved by the Dutch government and presented to the Council of Europe.
A significant reaction to this act of approval would soon follow. The Nederlandse Taalunie (‘Dutch Language Union’) made various negative comments about the request, although none of these were supported by any linguistic arguments. The organisation’s major concern, or so it seems, was the fragmentation of its own linguistic region. Several other responses also emerged, as West Limburg had addressed the same request to the Belgian government, and this had been rejected as a result of Flemish opposition. One of the possible reasons for the rejection might have been the larger political consequences that would have resulted in Belgium, had the request been approved. After all, Belgium’s political system was organised along linguistic lines, and recognition of Limburgish could potentially cause problems for the small Flemish majority within the Belgian state.
Notwithstanding the above reactions, Limburgish received political and legal recognition as a regional language in 1997. For the first time since Limburg’s inclusion in the Dutch state, recognition of the Limburgish language had been requested and officially recognised. This was the first time since their Catholic emancipation that Limburgers had clearly promoted a singular aspect of their identity, and had claimed and been granted recognition of it, within the Dutch state.
The request for recognition had been kept as low key as possible. The request was limited to political and legal recognition, and to the possibility of rescinding some of the prohibitions on the use of Limburgish, as well as enacting several measures to encourage awareness of the language. Nevertheless, the request left open an option to submit a subsequent request under Part III of the Charter, which would include a much larger and more detailed range of measures in regard to the language. In addition, the request outlined a list of promises to the Dutch government, perhaps in order to obtain political approval for recognition, but which were certainly also in accordance with the policies of Vereniging Veldeke.
First, recognition was requested for all dialects spoken in Limburg. In addition to the dialects of Limburgish, this also included recognition of the Kleverlandish dialects, which are part of Dutch, as well as the Rippuarian dialects, which are part of High German. Second, the aim was not to accord a greater value to Limburgish by promoting it from a dialect to a language. Third, the government was informed that no standard Limburgish would be created. Instead, the request asked for recognition of the ‘colourful diversity’ of all dialects spoken in Limburg. In brief, this meant that Limburgish would continue to function under Dutch, that it could not have a written standard and that measures for encouragement in informal settings would be provided, all of which would be implemented as policy in subsequent years. Finally, a package was developed in 2006, which provided information to schools about Limburgish and which focused on the dialect of Limburgish that was used locally.

Not everyone agreed with this view and positioning of Limburgish. Mr Paul Prikken and Mr Wim Kuipers were galvanised into action and endeavoured to find political support for the written standard for Limburgish that had been developed by their working group AGL. They found support in the Partij Nui Limbörg (PNL – ‘Party New Limburg’), which submitted a proposal containing several measures, including agreement on a standardised written language, to the East Limburgish parliament in 2000. As a result, the parliament asked Radboud University Nijmegen, the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (‘Catholic University Leuven’), Veldeke Limburg and the province of West Limburg for advice on the matter. The PNL’s proposal was heavily criticised, particularly because of its poor scientific underpinnings, and was rejected by all parties. West Limburg believed the proposal to be too radical. Even the press entered the debate, expressing opinions for and against the proposal.
Since the larger parties in the East Limburgish parliament disagreed with the proposal, the initiative was not realised, although some minor measures outlined in the proposal were adopted, e.g. the appointment of a regional language officer and the establishment of a ‘Limburgish Language Council’.
This Limburgish Language Council, i.e. the Raod veur 't Limburgs, is a committee which advises the East Limburgish parliament on measures in relation to Limburgish. The Council consists of academic experts on the Limburgish language, Veldeke Limburg, as well as persons who use Limburgish in public life. The regional language officer is the official spokesperson for the Limburgish Language Council and implements its work. Every few years, the Dutch state is obliged to provide a report to the Council of Europe about the implementation of policies in relation to Limburgish, as the introduction of these policies is compulsory under the Charter. The Limburgish Language Council assists with the preparation of this report. As a result, at the beginning of the 21st century, Limburgish has also become a subject of positive language policy measures.

References
Bakker, F., Kruijsen, J. (e.a.), Het Limburgs onder Napoleon; Achttien Limburgse en Rijnlandse dialectvertalingen van ‚De verloren zoon’ uit 1806-1807, Gopher Utrecht, 2007.
Belemans, R., Keulen, R., Taal in stad en land: Belgisch-Limburgs, Lannoo Tielt, 2004.
Evers, I. M. H., De Momus, Stichting Historische Reeks, no. 8, Maastricht, 1982.
Hansen, J., Het Recht van het Limburgs, De Vooruitgang Zuidbroek, 1947.
Hanson, M., Van Frans naar Nederlands, De taalsituatie in het Limburgs middelbaar onderwijs 1830 – 1914, Eisma Leeuwarden/Maastricht, 1990.
Israel, J. I., De Republiek 1477-1806, 5e druk, Van Wijnen Franeker, 2001.
Jappe Albers, W., Oorsprong en geschiedenis van de Limburgers, Elsevier Amsterdam, 1981.
Jongeneel, J., Dorpsspraak van Heerle; Vormenleer en woordenboek met taal- en geschiedkundige inleiding en bijlagen, van Hooren, Heerlen, 1980 (1884).
Kessels- van der Heijde, M., Maastricht, Maestricht, Mestreech; De taalverhoudingen tussen Nederlands, Frans en Maastrichts in de negentiende eeuw, Verloren Hilversum, 2002.
Linssen, C. A. A., Historische opstellen over Lotharingen en Maastricht in de Middeleeuwen, Van Gorcum Assen/Maastricht, 1985.
Jonghe, de, A., Taalpolitiek van Koning Willem I in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden (1814-1830); De genesis der taalbesluiten en hun toepassing, Brussel, 1943.
Knuvelder, G., Vanuit wingewesten,; een sociografie van het zuiden, Brand’s Hilversum, 1930.
Nissen, P. J. A., De ontplooiing van het regionaal zelfbewustzijn in de beide provincies Limburg na 1839, in: Eenheid en Scheiding van de beide Limburgen; verslagbundel van het op 26 mei 1989 te Alden Biesen gehouden congres bij gelegenheid van de herdenking 150 jaar beide Limburgen, Eisma Leeuwarden/Maastricht 1989, 181-212.
Robinson, O. W., Old English and its closest relatives; A survey of the earliest Germanic languages, Stanford University Press, 1992.
Schillings, H., Toneel en theater in Limburg, van Gorcum Assen, 1976.
Bakkes, P., Crompvoets, H., Notten, J., Walraven, F., Spelling 2003 voor de Limburgse dialecten.
Tervooren, Helmut, Van der Masen tot op den Rijn; ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der mittelalterlichen volkssprachlichen Literatur im Raum von Rhein und Maas, Historisches Verein für Geldern und Umgegend (105), 2005.
Ubachs, P. J. H., Handboek voor de geschiedenis van Limburg, Verloren Hilversum, 2000.
Ubachs, P. J. H., Evers, I. M. H., Ongewilde revolutie; het Limburgs Maasland onder Frankrijk 1794-1814, LGOG nr. 130 Mestreech, 1994.
Veldeke, jubileumnummer uitgegeven bij gelegenheid van het 25-jarig bestaan in 1951.
Vries, de, J. W., Willemyns, R., Bruger, P., Het verhaal van een taal; negen eeuwen Nederlands, Prometheus Amsterdam, 1993.
Weelen, P. (ed.), Ha! Tsjieng! Boem!, Limburgse Revues, Operettes en Musicals, TIC Mestreech, 2004.
Willemyns, R., Het verhaal van het Vlaams; De geschiedenis van het Nederlands in de Zuidelijke Nederlanden, Standaard Uitgeverij Antwerpen, 2003.

http://www.cfwb.be/langreg/present/pg001.htm (16-5-2007).
http://www.limburghuis.nl/ (10-6-2008).
http://www.ned.univie.ac.at/publicaties/taalgeschiedenis/en/anltexte.htm (28-5-2008).
http://www.uitgeverijtic.nl/ (13-6-2008).
http://www.veldeke.be/ (10-6-2008).
http://www.veldeke.net/ (10-6-2008).
http://www.veldeke-valkeberg.nl/ (28-9-2007).
http://www.ru.nl/dialect/wld/ (13-6-2008).