LL-L "Orthography" 2002.04.08 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 08.APR.2002 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: "Randy Elzinga" <frisiancow at hotmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" (was "Language varieties") 2002.04.07 (07)
[E]

>From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
>Subject: "Language varieties"
>
>American spelling seems to me a little easier and more logical
>than British so perhaps we should look forward to the day when
>the rest of us follow Merriam's example!

I look forward to the day when we follow a nearly totally consistent
system,
but such things seem to be for people who have nothing better to do on
Sunday afternoons (me for example).

But the differences
>are so slight it's hard to see what nuisance or confusion could
>be caused by it. The only actual problem I've had with American
>spellings is when I write "colour" for "color" in HTML and my
>web page refuses to work properly! I don't seem to make this
>mistake any more, however.

The words that end in -our are usually the words that give me most
trouble,
especially in word processors whose spell checkers tend to revert to US
English no matter how many times I pick Canadian English or even UK
English
as my language option.  Can anyone give a brief summary of the major
differences between UK and American standards?  I think perhaps that
Canada
has shifted to American spellings for many of the differences, so the
-our
words are the only ones that the spell checker picks out.

----------

From: Simon Hoare <simon.hoare at mail.be>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" (was "Language varieties") 2002.04.07 (07)
[E]

> > From: erek gass <egass at caribline.com>
> > Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.04.04 (09) [E]
> >
> > As many (perhaps, most of you) know, "American" spelling is essentially
> > Noah Webster's personal determination that America should have its own
> > system of spelling the same language used in the UK.

Hello everybody,

The English language is historically the language of the English and
English-speaking cultural space of those two islands off the northwest
coast of Europe (and particularly the one to the East). Yes, this
language has changed over time but its essential characteristics are
reflective of changes affecting the English people of Great Britain. The
change from Old English (Anglo-Saxon) is far more fundamental than
anything which has happened since.

"English" is just a language to Americans (and others) but to me it is
also a word that describes my culture, my history and the legal system
of the territory in which I live. I don't consider myself British. Why
should I? Britain was a classical (well, celto-romanic) throwback,
exploiting Roman roots at a time when classicism was very popular, and
also to help England in its ambitions to annex Scotland. Britain is
really the name given to the extension of England beyond its borders on
these islands.

Anyway, the point is, Americans are perfectly to entitled to use
whatever language forms you choose. However, by calling it English, you
are accepting cultural links with "the" English. You could call it
"American"; everyone would still want to speak it.

Compare, for example, the way Afrikaans severed its connections with
Dutch by calling itself "Afrikaans".

But I do not under any circumstances speak "British English". Otherwise,
you start inventing terms like "Scottish British English" and "English
British English" (the latter is just tautological nonsense).

Simon Hoare

PS I think Dr Johnson was no less reinventing English than Webster.
Perhaps Shakespeare's spelling should be regarded as the last word.

----------

R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Etymology

Simon,

I can certainly follow your logic and on a certain level relate to
your feelings.  You may be interested to know that in German-speaking
areas translations of literary works tend to be divided into _aus dem
Englischen übersetzt_ (translated from the English) vs _aus dem
Amerikanischen übersetzt_ (translated from the American).

However, let me play the devil's advocate and ask you where this would
end.  Would we not have to distinguish for instance "Australian," "South
African," "Indian," "Malaysian," "Nigerian," "Jamaican," "Welsh," etc.
(not counting English-based creoles in those areas)?  And how do you
distinguish Welsh English from Welsh?  All the above are primarily
(above 90%) English-based.  Their standard forms, including American,
Scottish and Irish, are really very, very closely related and to a very
high degree mutually intelligible when seen in the great scheme of
things.  Would we then not also have to start calling French of Belgium
(not counting Walloon) "Belgian," and even refer to Standard Dutch in
Belgium as "Belgian," or, as many "educated" people like to do, call it
"Flemish" (even those dialects that are not Flemish)?  What about German
in Austria, Switzerland and Belgium, all of which differ to minor
degrees from Standard German in Germany, with official differences in
Standard Australian and Swiss German?

Afrikaans speakers *chose* to have their language declared separate from
Dutch in an emancipation effort, and it certainly differs from Dutch
far, far more than American English differs from English of England (is
probably far closer to Zeelandic anyway).  Americans apparently consider
their language a dialect group of English, and I know of no movement
that wants it declared a separate language.  This is why people refer to
"American English," "Australian English," "New Zealand English,"
"Canadian English," "South African English," etc.  What to call English
of England is another question ...  "English English," "English proper"
;) ... or just "English"?

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 postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings 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
=======================================================================