LL-L "Morphology" 2002.05.24 (01) [D/E/Z]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 24.MAY.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: "Marco Evenhuis" <evenhuis at zeelandnet.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.05.23 (03) [E/Z]

Luc wrote:

> Indeed it is in both ways used like this.
> Number (1) nevertheless is slihtly different in it's pronounciation.
> We would say
> A: Ga'j naar de stad?
> B: Ja'kga (which is  slightly different)

and then Ron concluded:

> So, if I understood you correctly, your two language varieties (Marco =
> Zeelandic, Luc = Flemish) represent two stages of cliticization
> development (2 and 3 below):
>
> (1) Ja, ik ga naar de stad.
>     Jae, 'k gae (naè Stad) [Marco]
>
> (2) Ja'kga. [Luc]
>
> (3) Jae'k. [Marco]

I think we're talking about exactly the same forms here.
Luc's (2) is the same as my (1) and has little to do with
the 'personalized forms of yes and no' as Ron calls it.
The emphasis in my (1) and Luc's (2) is on the verb
(_ga_). In Luc's example, there is a slight pause be-
tween _ja_ and _'k_ and there is almost no pause
between _'k_ and _ga_.
In these examples, the personal pronoun is used in
exactly the same way as in English (Yes, I'm going)
or Dutch (ja, ik ga).

I think (3) really shows the phenomenon both Luc
and I were originally talking about. It is indeed a per-
sonalized form of yes and no. The _jae_ and _'k_ in
(3) are pronounced as one word, _jaek_ (the apostro-
phe is only there to make clear with what personal
pronoun we're dealing with here). And it can indeed
be used without a verb.

Ron:

> I am pretty sure that, in the absence of comparative data, they
> would be convinced that this "discovered" language variety has
> personalized forms of "yes" and "no."  Would that conclusion be valid?

See above. This conclusion would be valid indeed.

Regards,

Marco

----------

From: <burgdal32 at mac.com>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.05.23 (03) [E/Z]

> Some examples (in Zeelandic from Walcheren)
> in which the contraction always stands alone and
> the sentence between brackets is only put there
> for clarity's sake:
>
> a: Is 't geld van 't 'uus noe a gesturt?
> b: Jae't. ('t Stoeng op 't afschriftje van deze weeke)
Those are the Flemish versions:
F: a:Is 't geld van thus nu ol gestort?
   b:Jaet ('t stond up 't ofschriftje van van de weke)
> a: Gae jie mee nae de feêste?
> b: Jae'k. (Ik dienke da'k wè tied è)
F:a:Gae'j mee nao de feêste?
  b:Jaek ( 'k peize da'k wel tied gaon èn)
> a: È me noe nog wat gewonne mee de lôterie of nie?
> b: Jae'me. (Een kilo verse woste van de slachter op durp)
F:a:è me nu nog entwadde gewon' met de lotterie of niet'n,
  b:Jaem (jaew) (Ne kilo vesche wost van den beenhouwer in't dorp)
> a: 'Ebbe 'k nog vee raore diengen gezeid toen a 'k gister
> droenkig was?
> b: Neê'je. ('t Viel nog a mee)
F:a:è'k nog veel raore ding' gezeid ao'k daor dronke waere?
  b: Neie (neêg - nej)  (neêg= neen gij)  ('t  Viel nogol mee)

> Regards,
>
> Marco From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Morphology
>
> Thanks, Marco and Luc!
>
> So, if I understood you correctly, your two language varieties (Marco =
> Zeelandic, Luc = Flemish) represent two stages of cliticization
> development (2 and 3 below):
>
> (1) Ja, ik ga naar de stad.
> Jae, 'k gae (naè Stad) [Marco]
>
> (2) Ja'kga. [Luc]
>
> (3) Jae'k. [Marco](Luc)
>
> I find (3) rather remarkable, certainly noteworthy.
>
> Imagine that in a few hundred years time all or most of the language
> varieties of the types (1) and (2) are extinct or have all moved to
> stage (3), and atomic blasts have destroyed all written and electronic
> data about the linguistic ancestors, and further imagine that some
> linguists of that future time (speakers of, say, a future form of
> Mandarin) stumble across the remainder variety (or varieties) (of type
> (3)).  I am pretty sure that, in the absence of comparative data, they
> would be convinced that this "discovered" language variety has
> personalized forms of "yes" and "no."  Would that conclusion be valid?
>
> Regards,
> Reinhard/Ron

The conclusion is that it feels already like this. In Belgium the people
of
the other regions don't use this at all. They would certainly say these
are
personalised forms of "yes" and" no".
P.S.: In French-Flanders it is used also!

Groetjes
Luc Vanbrabant
Oekene

==================================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
=======================================================================