LL-L "Morphology" 2002.02.26 (01) [E]
Lowlands-L
sassisch at yahoo.com
Tue Feb 26 16:43:05 UTC 2002
======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.FEB.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: "Browne, Kevin at Astronaut" <BrowneK at brevard.k12.fl.us>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.02.22 (13) [E]
Hoi Laaglanders,
You wrote:
_frag-_ - _frug_ - _gefragt_
I suppose Ron, that would explain the Dutch:
vragen - vroeg -gevraagd ?
Kevin Browne
----------
From: Rudi Vari <rudi at its.co.za>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.02.25 (03) [E]
Hallo Lowlanders
Jan Strunk wrote:
> Of course, there also cases (though fewer) where originally weak verbs
> have become strong.
One example of this is the verb 'to dive', which at least in American English
recently has become 'dive, dove' instead of the English English 'dive, dived'.
If my memory serves me correctly, this verb is still strong in Dutch: 'duiken,
dook'. Whether this has influenced American English at all, seems to be rather
unlikely.
What say the experts?
Kind regards
Rudi Vári
----------
From: "Ian James Parsley" <parsleyij at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Posh over-correction" 2002.02.25 (05) [E]
Ron,
There are probably quite a few examples of
'over-correction', not always with verbs.
'Frug' (and conjunctive 'fruege') is probably a good
example of this. One in English is 'proven', which of
course has legal use in Scotland but 'prove' was never
a strong verb (or at least was never recorded as
such).
Of course, the real classic is the English 'for you
and I'.
Regards,
=====
------------------
Ian James Parsley
www.geocities.com/parsleyij
+44 (0)77 2095 1736
JOY - "Jesus, Others, You"
----------
From: Ted.Harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk
Subject: LL-L [catched]"Morphology" 2002.02.24 (03) [E]
> From: "John M. Tait" <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.02.21 (07) [E]
>
> Tom McRae wrote:
>
>>'Getting catched' was used by some working people
>>in Edinburgh when I grew up there. They would also say
>>'He catched a fish'. My guess is this originated in the
>>City's large working class Irish population.
I've been scraping my brain for the details of a memory
of "catched" and now it's come back.
It was in a little book called "The Specialist", one of
those small humorous books of cartoons and text, which
was about the art of building outside toilets out of
timber as recounted by a "specialist" in the art.
Anyway, a running thread in the book was the necessity
of having a good working bolt on the inside of the
door. Otherwise, while you wuz in thur contemplatin',
someone cud com up and open the door "and then you'd
be catched."
As I recall, it was written and published in America.
And it was many years ago. (1955?)
Best wishes to all,
Ted.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <Ted.Harding at nessie.mcc.ac.uk>
Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 167 1972
Date: 26-Feb-02 Time: 00:41:03
------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------
----------
From: "Jan Strunk" <strunk at linguistics.ruhr-uni-bochum.de>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.02.25 (05) [E]
Dear Lowlanders,
> A few seconds after I sent off the preceding issue (Ian and John Magnus
> on "Morphology"), I remembered that I grew up saying in German for 'to
> ask' _frag-_ - _frug_ - _gefragt_. However, bear in mind that in my
> early years I was primarily exposed to a speech mode range between
> "broad" Hamburg German and outright Missingsch (German on Low
> Saxon/Low
> German substrate), with an admixture of (mostly closeted) Low Saxon.
> "Proper" German was something you could only try to aim at over the
> years, and it was confined to school, media and rare encounters with
> "posh" folks (most of whom, however, spoke "posh" *Hanseatic* German of
> Hamburg, which at that time was a far cry from what is considered
> "proper" these days). It was only after I got sufficiently "educated"
> and figured out that my low-class "accent" caused discrimination that I
> switched to preterite _fragte_, i.e., treated _fragen_ properly as a
> weak verb.
The older folks in the Ruhr Area say "frug", too, for example my
grandparents. But I don't remember hearing them say "posh"
[fru:k] instead of [fru:x].
But there is some similar (?) influence on other words:
for example you rarely hear the "more Low Saxon" [vech] (away).
This is much more often pronounced [vek]. Although people will
regularly say [ve:ch] (way). Besides, it is "väk" in the Scandinavian
languages, too.
I think the clear tendency in all Germanic languages is to produce
more reguralities, i.e. many strong verbs become weak, and other
phenomena like "Rückumlaut" and ablaut in the imperative get lost.
As children we were corrected very often, when we said something
like "Werf ma den Ball rüber!" (Throw me the ball!) or "Geb ma her!"
(Give it to me!). But even today I use these forms or even forms like
"Ich gib dir gleich eins hinter die Löffel!" (don't really know how to
translate this) instead of the regular "ich gebe". I have the feeling that
the verbs are becoming more regular by remaining in one Ablautform.
Moreover I think that there is no intuitive feeling of difference anymore
between real strong verbs, e.g. to sing, and other "irregular" verbs such
as to think (if I am correct that this is no strong verb).
Thus more irregular verbs like to think and to bring could be easily made
more regular by analogy to bigger classes of strong verbs like the
i - a - u paradigma, thus bring, brang, brung without becoming
weak verbs.
Gued gaon,
Jan Strunk
strunk at linguistics.ruhr-uni-bochum.de
----------
From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Morphology
Thanks for your interesting responses, folks.
> You wrote:
> _frag-_ - _frug_ - _gefragt_
>
> I suppose Ron, that would explain the Dutch:
> vragen - vroeg -gevraagd ?
Indeed. I wonder if it is an old German alternative form, or if it is
inspired by Low Saxon (Low German) _fröög(')_. This form is umlauted because
of the final /-e/ which in many dialects then gets dropped. Thus underlyingly
it is /frouge/. Dutch /u:/ (spelled <oe>) and Low Saxon /ou/ (spelled <oo>)
correspond regularly (e.g., _goed_ = _good_ 'good', _boek_ = _Book_ 'book',
_genoeg_ = _(ge)noog_ 'enough'), and this corresponds to German /u:/ (hence
_gut_, _Buch_, _genug_ and _frug_).
Ian:
> Of course, the real classic is the English 'for you
> and I'.
Very much so. It's used so frequently around here that I am beginning to
expect it to become acceptable or even standard, if it has not already done
so.
Jan:
> But there is some similar (?) influence on other words:
> for example you rarely hear the "more Low Saxon" [vech] (away).
> This is much more often pronounced [vek]. Although people will
> regularly say [ve:ch] (way). Besides, it is "väk" in the Scandinavian
> languages, too.
True. In our Lower Elbe area we pronounce _weg_ 'away' [vEC] (to rhyme with
_frech_ 'sassy', 'cheeky') in both Low Saxon (Low German) and Missingsch, as
well as in Missingsch-influenced German dialects. However, you hear the
pronunciation [vEk] (to rhyme with _keck_ 'perky', 'bold') more and more
often. While I believe that Swedish _väk_ is derived from Low Saxon _weg_, I
assume that the /k/ is a regular *Swedish* rendering of "German" [C].
> As children we were corrected very often, when we said something
> like "Werf ma den Ball rüber!" (Throw me the ball!) or "Geb ma her!"
> (Give it to me!). But even today I use these forms or even forms like
> "Ich gib dir gleich eins hinter die Löffel!" (don't really know how to
> translate this) instead of the regular "ich gebe". I have the feeling that
> the verbs are becoming more regular by remaining in one Ablautform.
Exactly as in my case in Hamburg. Living abroad, I say "properly" _Gib mal
her_ and _Ich geb(e) dir gleich eins hinter die Löffel_ (old-fashioned?
British "I'll give you a box on the ear in a minute," _Löffel_ 'spoon(s)' also
denoting the ears of hares and rabbits) -- though I never say the latter
except to my eternally cheeky younger brother when he gets totally out of
control. This is because I speak German with German speakers from all over
Germany, Austria and Switzerland here. Once I visit Northern Germany or speak
with a North German here, I soon slip back into the _Geb ma her!_ and _Ich gib
dir gleich eins hinter die Löffel!_ mode. This is a matter of social
acceptability. In laid-back, friendly conversations among North Germans (at
least of my generation) the "proper" way may come across as "uppety."
As a postscript about my mother, she gradually moved away from almost pure
Missingsch toward more or less Missingsch-tinged German because of my father's
asbsence (death), my youngest siblings' influence and increased access to the
electronic media and their promotion of Standard German. She made a quick
spurt in this direction toward the end of her life (which was about ten weeks
ago). However, she never fully mastered the distinction between dative and
accusative marking (since Missingsch, like Low Saxon, has only one objective
case-marking system, i.e., treats dative and accusative alike, as do Dutch and
English, for instance). She rarely used preterite forms, except when she
wanted to sound sophisticated or was in a certain story-telling mode.
(Missingsch avoids preterite forms even more than do most Low Saxon dialects,
using past perfect forms instead.) Genitive forms with _des_ or _der_ (e.g.,
_der Verfasser des Buches_ 'the author of the book' or _der Bruder der
Lehrerin_ 'the brother of the teacher') were outside the acceptable range,
i.e., were too "posh," and she would use the _von_ forms instead (_der
Verfasser von (d)em Buch_ and _der Bruder von (d)er Lehrerin_, though in pure
Missingsch that would be _der Verfasser von (d)as Buch_ and _der Bruder von
(d)ie Lehrerin_, cf. Low Saxon _de Schriever vun dat Book_ and _de Broder vun
de Lehrersch_).
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
=======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list