LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.11.09 (02) [E]

Sat Nov 9 07:19:54 UTC 2002

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 09.NOV.2002 (02) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.lowlands-l.net>  Email: admin at lowlands-l.net
 Rules & Guidelines: <http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm>
 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>
=======================================================================
 You have received this because you have 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>.
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
 L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic
               V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Criostoir O Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.11.08 (02) [E]

Dear all,

Thanks ever so much, George - a very comprehensive set of answers. I would
like to respond to a few of your points.

1. "Canadian has sounded distinct from British English for a couple of
centuries. The failure to drop "r"s in our dialects (unlike BBC, some New
England and southern US) reflects our relatively strong Scots influence."

I would imagine, particularly in Ontario, the Maritimes and parts of British
Columbia, that Canadian speech would be heavily beholden (although perhaps
not so much these days) to nine-county Ulster English, particularly to
Ulster Scots, given that in the 19th Century, Ontario (alongside New
Zealand) was a primary destination of emigrant Irish Protestants (I believe
every Prime Minister of Canada up until Diefenbaker was an Orangeman). This
may in fact be the "Scots influence" of which you speak.

"The younger generations - especially on the west coast, are sounding more
like teenagers in California..."

I've noticed this from Ireland to Australia to England and back to Ireland
again. It's solely down to the near-hegemony of California-based United
States pop culture "cool". I still believe it's a phase most go through and
eventually abandon. Do Canadians feel linguistically under threat from
Americanisation? Do they attempt to emphasise "Canadianisms" in their
speech? Again I come back to some pseudo-examples of difference that between
Canadian and American speech that I've heard: a) "pissed" to mean drunk (US.
"angry"); b) "petrol" (US. "gas"); c) "Kraft dinner" (US. "TV dinner"). Are
these giving way at all (if they are true)?

Secondly, a more sociological question: do Canadians generally see the
United States as a threat to their independence, as a neighbour that must be
placated, or as a respectful friend?

2. "The French influence on Canadian English is almost entirely on
vocabulary - particularly officialese. In the province of Quebec, this
means that English is laced with terrms which sound odd eleswhere in
Canada. Instead of Inland Revenue or the IRS, for example, we have "Revenue
Canada". During the 60s it was discovered that an easy route to official
bilingualism in naming public sector entities was to choose a Latin based
noun common to English and French, and to stick "Canada" on the end of it
to indicate federal government ownership. It has also resulted in such
monstrosities as a government fitness promotion program called
"Participaction." This sort of thing is a bit of a jokle, especially among
Anglophone Quebeckers..."

I think it's quite an elegant solution, personally. Canada in my opinion
should be proud of its total bilingualism. In the Republic of Ireland, where
Irish is the first official language and English the second, you'd have to
search very hard to find any Irish at all on government publications, even
less in the media, and absolutely zero in commerce. Acts of the Dáil
(national assembly) are no longer published in Irish. Irish is increasingly
a symbolic afterthought, whereas at least in Canada there is a commitment to
bilingualism (as is the case in Wales), ubiquitously manifest. Of course it
helps that French and English share some vocabulary; it's difficult for
Irish and English to co-exist in that way in Ireland. "Ireland" is "Éire" in
Irish, for example, so "Education Ireland" would be "Oideachas Éireann",
with the added complication of genitives and mutation, it's hard to utilise
the Canadian commitment to bilingualism here, unfortunately. Francophones
may moan and groan about Canada, but their situation is nothing compared to
trying to live an Irish-speaking life in Ireland - an increasing
impossibility. "Participation" is a wonderful try at linguistic
conciliation - credit (or is that crédit?) where credit/crédit is due!

4. "There are several Newfoundland accents. Newfoundland was predominantly
settled from two very distinct sources - southwest Ireland and southwest
England."

Coincidentally, there was a Newfoundlander diplomat on the news here
yesterday, discussing the UN. At first I thought he was Irish (I had walked
in halfway through the interview), because Ireland has at the moment a seat
on the Security Council. Only his /r/ gave him away, otherwise I would have
considered him an upper-class Munsterman. Of course, as you rightly point
out, many England English accents also have a trace of Newfoundland in them
(and vice versa); largely because they have fossilised older pronunciations
(e.g., [te:] for "tea"). Most Irish accents do this too, which is why I have
heard tell that Shakespeare sounded Irish. He didn't, it's just that
Hiberno-English retains much Elizabethan phonology - Newfoundland and
South-West English do this, too. (If you ever get a chance, compare some
Newfoundland accents to West Cornwall English.)

5. "The Loyalist migration was early enough to be formative in the English
speaking regions where it was dominant. Since the Yankees were overwhelmed
by the Irish Italian Portuguese immigrations etc. in the late 19th and
early 20th century, Loyalist Canadians in Eastern Ontario and southern New
Brunswick perhaps sound more like the inhabitants of upstate New York and
western New England did in the 18th century than the urban residents of
those regions do today."

You'll have to forgive me, but I don't know what those accents sound like.
Could you give a few examples of phonology? What was the Yankee accent of
the time like?

Many thanks again! Go raibh míle maith agatsa arís! This is fun.

Críostóir.

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language varieties

Thomas Byro wrote yesterday:

> Although I have forgotten my Plattdeutsch, I have been aware for years
that
> my Hochdeutsch is not standard.  For example, I tend to substitute ch for
> "g", such as saying Berch instead of Berg.  Is this due to Plattsdeutsch
> influence on the Hochdeutsch spoken in Westphalia?

Tom,

I don't think it has anything to do with "perfect."  The pronunciation you
described (i.e., final fricativization of /g/) is definitely considered to
be within the range of Standard German.  Yes, it may indeed go back to a
Lowlands Saxon ("Low German") substratum, at least in part, but this and
similar features are found in many other German dialects as well, the
alternative stop pronunciation (/g/ -> [k]) being predominantly an Upper
German, thus an extreme southern, feature that nowadays is considered marked
(exceptional) by most German speakers in Germany (though not in Bavaria,
Austria and Italy).

(I use your pronunciation when relaxed and use the [k] pronuciation
occasionally in very formal situations when I try to suppress my Northern
"accent".)

Note that the /g/ remains phonemically a /b/, hence _Berg_ [bE3`C]
'mountain' (= southern [bErk]) vs. _Berge_ ['bE3`g@] 'mountains'.

In Northern Lowlands Saxon of Germany it is _Barg_ [ba:x] vs _Bargen_
['ba:gN=].

In some German dialects, such as many in Saxony (which doesn't deserve its
name) and Thuringia, this /g/ has become phonemically (i.e., consistently)
/C/ or /S/, hence _Berk_ [b@`C] ~ [b@`S] vs. _Berge_ ['b@`C@] ~ ['b@`S@]
(as though written _Ber(s)ch_ vs. _Ber(s)che_).

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
* 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>.
=======================================================================