LL-L "Orthography" 2002.10.28 (06) [S]

Mon Oct 28 18:32:22 UTC 2002

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 28.OCT.2002 (06) * 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: Andy (Scots-Online) <andy at scots-online.org>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.10.27 (04) [S]

Sandy Fleming wrate:

<sned>

>     o    it's better if a spellin can staun as a unique
>          signifier for a wird (sae's the transliteration
>          saftware disna git fanklt ower the likes o <wid>
>          ("wood") an <wud> ("mad"), for example, it wad be
>          better tae wale <wid> for "wood" - if the <wud>
>          spellin wis nott at the last, the transliterator
>          could haunle it).

A uise <wid> (wood), <wud> (mad) an <wad> (would)

O course dependin on dialect or stress etc. thir coud aw be spelt <wid or
wud>. Thaim that's thirlt tae writin Scots as different fae English as
possible e'en gin it isna phonologically soond whiles uises <wuid> bi
analogy wi <guid> [gId].

> Onywey, ae parteeclar area o spellin A'm no shuir aboot is
> auxiliaries, espaecially the conditionals written in English
> <would>, <could> an <should>, an as weel, <shall>.
>
> The questions is:
>
>     o    A tak it that the best wey tae spell <could> an
>          <should> is wi the saicondary vowel, ie <cuid> an
>          <shuid>?
A dinna gree here acause the unnerlyin phoneme isna whit a bodie for ordinar
sees as bein ahint <ui> (In sae faur as ye gree on the preenciple o
unnerlyin phonemes) Baith thae wirds haes stresst an unstresst forms [kud,
kId, kVd] an NE [kwId], [Sud, SId, SVd] an mair aulder [sud, sId, s at d]
Shuirly <ui> wad predeect [Sid or sid] in NE on in some airts e'en [Sed or
sed].

In writin (ye can dae whit ye want in dialogue) A juist uise the stresst
forms <coud> an <shoud> wither or no drappin the <l> is a guid idea or no is
debatable. The aulder <suld> or <sud> is aiblins best uised syne that's
whit's for ordinar in dictionars.

>     o    Ar the ony kin o differ wirth preservin atween the
>          forms <shuid> an <shall> an <suid> an <sall> in
>          traditional texts, or wad A be as weel tae settle
>          on the tae kin o sibilant an lat the transliterator
>          owerset tae the tither gin it's wantit?

<sall> is the aulder form an <shall> the Englifee'd ane. Aiblins best haud
wi whit the author wrate unless they come up wi anither spellin for thir.

>     o    What alternative spellins ar the for <wad>, that
>          wad sinder it fae <wad> meanin "mairy"? The SND
>          suggests <wald> - appearinly the /l/ is or wis
>          soondit in some airts, but A div still want the
>          electronic texts tae be in weel-kent Scots for whan
>          a transliterator's no tae haun. A dout <wald> micht
>          no be a guid representation o the uizual range o
>          pronunciations ootthrou the Lawlands?

A jalouse that <wald> is gey an auld fae afore the <l> wis vocalised cf. baw
(ball) couter (culter) etc. A dinna ken o onie modren uiss o [wald]. Modren
[wad, wId, wVd] giein <wid> an <wud> an o coorse the phonologically unsoond
<wuid>. A haud wi <wad> it bein the tradeetional leeterar furm, it sinders
fae <wid> (wood) an <wud> (mad) an aw. That lea's us wi <wad> meanin
"mairie". A decidit tae thole thae twa homophones <wad> (would, wed).

If she wad he wid gang wid in the wid.
If she wad he wud gang wud in the wud.
If she wad he wuid gang wuid in the wuid.
If she wad he wad gang wud in the wid.
(If she married he would go mad in the wood)

A prefer the last ane. Monie ither combinations is o coorse possible.

Andy Eagle

----------

From: Andy (Scots-Online) <andy at scots-online.org>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.10.27 (10) [S]

Sandy Fleming wrate

> > Fae: R. F. Hahn

> > Sandy, Fowk,
<sned>

> The'r some odds atween ma spellin an Colin's that A understaun
> like this:
>
> 1. Colin (A think) haes tried tae follae dictionars like the
> SND an CSD. The spellins in thame's aa tae crockanition, tho
> A'm shuir Colin's managed tae pit some order on the chaos for
> his beuk (an thare a example o ae differ - Colin writes <buik>
> lippenin tae the dictionars an certain historical uises, while
> A write <beuk> tae better shaw the modern soondin o the wird).

A uise <beuk> an aw for the selsame raison. Tho <buik> isna necessar wrang.
Its ane o the ootcomes o the modren variants o historical <ui>.
It stairtit oot as /o:/ in Anglo-Saxon an  becam /2/ in aulder Scots. An gin
A'v liftit it richt, wi lang an short variants reflectit in the aulder Scots
spellins uisin <ui> an <u(Consonant)e> the <i> bein a merker o lenth cf.
aulder <ai>, <ei>, <oi> an aw.

Afore /k/ an /x/ it becam /(j)u/ or /(j)V/ dependin or dialect an whiles
parteeclar wirds. Colin mentions thon in his beuk as pairt o his expoondin o
the <ui> 'rule'.

> 2. Colin writes a <y> afore wirds like <yuize> - this aye
> surprises me cause A soonds this <y> (/j/) in ma ain dialeck
> but A wadna thocht a Buchan man like Colin wad a soondit it!
> Even tho A say it A dinna masel write it wi hou the'r ither
> wirds in ma dialeck that haes this /j/. For example, A'd hae
> tae write <ae> as <yae>, <ane> as <yin>, <aiblins> as <yiblins>
> an siclike gin A war tae write <yuize> an <yuise> like Colin
> dis. Sae no writin this <y> seems tae me tae gie a mair
> universal (/jInI'vE:rs=l/ -> <yuiniversal>!) kin o orthography.

A gang alang wi Sandy here.

> 3. In writin the likes o <monie> for ma <mony>, Colin's gaun
> wi his theory o vowel hermony. A'd caa this a guid idea gin
> vowel hermony wis widespreed in Scots, but it's no. It wad mak
> richt spellin faur ower hard for fowk disna ken Colin's parteeclar
> dialeck.

A juist deal wi thaim as 'morphemes' tho some o thaim isna richt morphemes
but for practical raison a deal wi thaim as siclike.
Thair pronunciation depends on sindrie factors. A tak it native speakers wad
pronounce thaim richt. Eg.

The negative <-na> that some fowk spells <-nae> tho <na> is the historical
leeterar furm.
Diminutive <ie>
Adjective and adverbial <(l)ie> or <(l)y> Whither ye uise <ie> or <y> is a
maiter o personal opeenion. Ane's as guid as the tither tho fameeliarity
micht suggest uisin <y>.
The final <ae> in wirds lik <arrae>, <windae> an <meidae> etc. coud juist as
weel be written <arra>, <winda> an <meida>.
The suffix <-fu> (full) e.g. awfu = awe + fu an etymological spellin. Monie
fowk gaes for phonetic spellins eg. awfae, awfa, awfie, offy etc.

> 4. Colin's uise o <ie>, <ei>, <ee>, <ea>, <ae> micht no be the
> same as mines. As faur as A can lift the principles, A uizes
> diaphonemics for the /e:/, /i(:)/ soonds across dialecks, an
> again the ettle here's makkin the spellin as universal as A
> can.

A uise <ei> an <ea> for wirds that haes aither /e/ or /i/ dependin o dialect
an whiles wirds. <ei> for ordinar cognates wi the likes o  'head', dead' an
'deaf' etc. an <ea> for the lave eg. beat an meat.
<ee> for wirds that haes /i/ in aw dialects e.g. airtifeecial, cheese,
ceevil, weel an wheen etc.

> Hivin sayed aa this, baith ma spellins an Colin's is aa fanklt
> wi English orthographic 'principles', an sae ye can haurly expeck
> conseestency onywey! A ken fine nouadays hou tae heyst masel oot
> this historic boggie, but A'v got it on guid authority that naebody
> wad want tae read ma Scots if A did!

That's a kinch ye hae tae deal wi gin ye're efter fowk readin whit ye write.
Gaun ower far fae the weel-kent English preenciples micht mak it
incomprehensible tae thaim that's no acquent wi whit ye're daein. A ettle
tae uise spellins that can be fund in the CSD. Tho no aye the heid wird. The
spellins that fits the 'polyphonemic theory' is maist aw thare.

R. F. Hahn wrate:

<sned>

> "Diaphonemics across dialecks" soonds guid (geud?).  Noo ye're truelins
> speikin ma langage!  Bit A unerstaun at there's aye a mids i the sea
atween
> at an whit five echt can accep.
>
> Whit's needit is a comparativ table o the (dia-)phonemes and the odds o
> spellin them.  Weel, at's a haundlin for yer rife by-time.  ;)

Thare's ane at http://www.scots-online.org/airticles/phonology.pdf

Andy Eagle

==================================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>.
=======================================================================