LL-L: "Language policies" LOWLANDS-L, 23.FEB.2000 (05) [E]
Lowlands-L Administrator
sassisch at yahoo.com
Wed Feb 23 22:19:01 UTC 2000
=======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 23.FEB.2000 (05) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
=======================================================================
From: Edwin Michael Alexander [edsells at idirect.com]
Subject: LL-L: "Grammar" LOWLANDS-L, 23.FEB.2000 (02) [E]
At 07:39 AM 02/23/00 -0800, Colin Wilson wrote:
>Another non-Lowlandic language, Finnish, has a verb "saada" which
>is usually translated as "to get" and which also has both
>meanings "may/can" and "receive/obtain".
>
>"Saat savukkeita" -> "You('ll) get some cigarettes"
>"Saat polttaa" - > "You('ll) get to smoke"
>
>It may be chance, or may be one of the many signs of Indo-European
>influence on Finnish.
It would seem that the word <get> descends from the IE root GHED, and has
Germanic relatives in "forget", "vergessen", "beget", and "guess" (somehow
originally "take aim") among others, and on the Latin side "pre-hendere"
"prendre", "comprehend", "prize", "surprise", etc. etc.
The English use of the word does seem a bit figurative, but certainly not
beyond the bounds of the root meaning.
How is it that English uses the word <get> while in Frisian it's <krije> or
HG <kriegen> (speaking of overused words!).
And at 07:39 AM 02/23/00 -0800, Eldo Neufeld wrote:
>re: "to get to (verb)" under recent discussion, in the sense of permission
>or privilege, I always get perturbed when I hear the use of another tense
>of the verb "to get," as, for example, in the following:
>
> "we've got to do something"
> "something's got to be done"
> "I gotta go"
Not to be perturbed, once you analyze it:
[I have got (gotten)] [to do something (the task of doing something)] or [I
have received the job of doing something]
>The meaning here is, of course, "to have to," rather than "to get to," but
>why the prevalence of the verb "to get" in such a variety of senses? Is
>this simply American slang? Is it related to the question of "to get to
>(verb)"?
I would doubt this use is American slang, but goes back farther than that
in history.
Ed Alexander
JAG REALTY INC.
80 Jones Street Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8R 1Y1
Pager: 905-545-0177 Fax: 905-525-6671 Email: edsells at idirect.com
Jag Realty Inc.: http://www.deerhurst.com/jag/
Ontario Ultra Series: http://ous.kw.net/
Burlington Runners Club: http://www.deerhurst.com/brc/
----------
From: john feather [johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk]
Subject: Grammar
I've just read through the messages about Ron's "get to {verb}". To me it
has an alien quality, and I think I would regard it as an Americanism, even
if now well-rooted and flourishing here. My parents wouldn't have said it.
I don't find it easy to define the meaning precisely. The subtleties can get
eroded. For example, it seems entirely possible to say to a child: "We'll
all sing `Happy Birthday' and then you'll get to blow out the candles" with
no particular signification of permission, just of sequence. So while some
people may use the phrase to impart some specific colour to their words,
along the lines which others have suggested, many people may use it with no
difference in sense from a simple future. There is also, of course, the
ironical use: "Jackie gets an ice cream and I get to sit [unwillingly] next
to Granpa."
The "smoothing" of the meaning provides an interesting comparison with the
verb "get" which in some cases loses the specific connotation of
"acquisition" and acquires the meaning of "possession". "He's got a black
eye" now simply means that he has it, not that he acquired it.
The verb "få" in Swedish has uses similar to (and possibly wider than) its
equivalent in Danish.
I'd be interested to know why Ron is reluctant to embrace Americanisms.
----------
From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Grammar
Ed wrote:
> How is it that English uses the word <get> while in Frisian it's <krije> > or
> HG <kriegen> (speaking of overused words!)
True, and for all intents and purposes _kriegen_ is a German verb now.
However, just between us, I believe (and I can't verify it this very minute)
that originally a Low Saxon (Low German) loan used as a somewhat substandard
alternative for _bekommen_ 'to get', 'to receive'. It is _kriegen_ ['kri:gN]
in Low Saxon, with no alternative choices. I suppose it would be something
like *_kreigen_ if it were a German word. If _kriegen_ was borrowed, as I
assume it was, this happened after the /ii/ > /ai/ shift.
This brings me to Colin's example of "to get to {verb}" in Finnish:
> "Saat polttaa" - > "You('ll) get to smoke"
Does this really mean "You('ll) be permitted/get a chance to smoke" or rather
"You('ll) get something to smoke" > "You('ll) get a smoke/smokes" where the
partitive ("partial accusative") is involved, as e.g. in _söin omenaa_ 'I eat
some apple'? Note the same in Colin's other example:
> "Saat savukkeita" -> "You('ll) get some cigarettes"
This would then be similar to German _Du bekommst/kriegst zu essen_ "You get
to eat" = 'You('ll) get something to eat', 'You'll get some food' (~ _Du
bekommst/kriegst etwas zu essen_ "You('ll) get something to eat"). So this
would be quite different from English "You'll get to eat" = 'You'll be
permitted/get a chance to eat'.
John asked:
> I'd be interested to know why Ron is reluctant to embrace Americanisms.
John, don't pay too much attention to it. My tongue is always in my cheek
when I say things to that effect, though not all that firmly planted. Even
though I live in the States, I am not American. I'm just a "confused" L3
speaker of English, having begun with BBC English as a model (with sojourns in
Britain), then having been immersed in the English varieties of my adopted
country Australia, and for the past years having been intensively exposed to
American varieties of English. Of course I'm quite aware that at the end of
the day any resistance will prove to be futile, and I'm going "down" the
American road anyway. I find "to embrace" too strong a word, though, but
perhaps that's the root of my "problem." I've adopted American spelling,
although I'm able to switch back to non-American spelling. I pretty much
love, certainly enjoy, American English, and attaching value to any language
variety has always been alien to me. So, no, I don't think of it as a disease
I'm likely to catch, am just kidding around. Falling into a certain category
has never been my forté or desire. Hey! It's more acceptable to speak good
"weird" than to speak weird American. Also bear in mind that a larger number
of people here find me "mysterious," "interesting" or even "sexy" with this
indefinable "accent" of mine, and there's a lot to be said for that. ;)
Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
==================================END===================================
You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
as message text from the same account to
<listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=======================================================================
* Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
* Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
type of format, in your submissions
=======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list