LL-L "Grammar" 2003.02.26 (04) [E]

Wed Feb 26 16:28:31 UTC 2003

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.FEB.2003 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * admin at lowlands-l.net * Encoding: Unicode UTF-8
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) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Dan Prohaska <prohaskadan at aol.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2003.02.25 (11) [E]

>Jim Gretch wrote:

(Gabriele:)
>> "Lay down, Sally"

>isn't as incorrect as it at first seems.

>This could actually be a case of an "understood" reflexive,
>i.e. "Lay (yourself) down, Sally."
> "Leg' dich hin, Sally."

>Of course, for the resulting position, one should
>always use "lying down."

(Gabriele:)
>> 2) This one really hurts, and I almost never see it
>> applied correctly (except on this forum not so long
>> ago): "It didn't used to be this way", or "I didn't
>> used to like her".
>> How can this not even sound "funny" to those who say that
>> instead of "didn't
>> use to"?

>Remember, though, that in *spoken* colloquial language,
>the initial "t-" of "to" colors (colours) the final
>"-d" of "used," so the two would sound virtually identical
>([ju.stu]). Because the writers are so "used to" the
>combination with "-d," they carelessly add it even
>when the past tense is already supplied by the "didn't"
>right in front of it.

I completely agree with Jim here.

Ian James Parsley wrote:

>My personal gripe numero uno is people saying 'He's
>stood over there' as opposed to 'He's standing over
>there'. Using the past participle indicates to me that
>someone is forcibly holding the person there - which
>is somewhat unlikely in most cases.

This is simply interference from dialect. In my opinion it is totally
acceptable in the spoken word. I also use it sometimes. It is widely used in
Lancashire and I dare say throughout most of northern England. It is correct
syntax in the traditional regional dialects of Lancashire. I`d put this
under regional variation. I actually like this construction very much.

>And then there are people who say 'between you and I'
>as a hypercorrection...
>And people who say 'Barcelona' with a lisp on the
><c>...

I fully agree with you here.

Dan

----------

From: Gary Taylor <gary_taylor_98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Grammar

Hello

Ian wrote

"My personal gripe numero uno is people saying 'He's
stood over there' as opposed to 'He's standing over
there'."

As this list accepts dialects without condemning them,
I have to say that "He's stood over there" and "He's
sat over there" are perfectly acceptable in the
Estuary dialect!! I would however not use them when
writing, but I do say them. It's one of the few places
where Estuary (and London) grammar differs from
standard English grammar.

So please don't hold a grudge against me for using my
local speech.

Gary

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2003.02.25 (15) [E]

Sandy wrote:
"...things that are worse than anything
you've quoted, such as "my wife and I" where in English it's
much more normal (and historically more supportable) to say
"me and my wife".

I always used to write, "my wife and me" but caved in recently after getting
weary of being 'corrected' to "my wife and I". I still say _mi waaif en mie_
when I speak, though.

Language usage is a low-level war of attrition.

Go raibh maith agaibh

Criostóir.

----------

From: Allison Turner-hansen <athansen at arches.uga.edu>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2003.02.25 (15) [E]

> From: Jim Gretch <jgretch at ugf.edu <mailto:jgretch at ugf.edu>>
> Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2003.02.25 (11) [E]
>
> Gabriele wrote:
>
> > 1) "I like to lay on the sofa and watch TV" -
>
> That is clearly incorrect, but perhaps
>
> > "Lay down, Sally"
>
> isn't as incorrect as it at first seems.
>
> This could actually be a case of an "understood" reflexive,
> i.e. "Lay (yourself) down, Sally."
> "Leg' dich hin, Sally."
>
> Of course, for the resulting position, one should
> always use "lying down."
>
> > 2) This one really hurts, and I almost never see it
> > applied correctly (except on this forum not so long
> > ago): "It didn't used to be this way", or "I didn't
> > used to like her".
> > How can this not even sound "funny" to those who say that
> > instead of "didn't
> > use to"?
>
> Remember, though, that in *spoken* colloquial language,
> the initial "t-" of "to" colors (colours) the final
> "-d" of "used," so the two would sound virtually identical
> ([ju.stu]). Because the writers are so "used to" the
> combination with "-d," they carelessly add it even
> when the past tense is already supplied by the "didn't"
> right in front of it.
>
> Jim Gretch
> Great Falls, Montana
>
> ----------
>
> From: Ian James Parsley <parsleyij at yahoo.com <mailto:parsleyij at yahoo.com>>
> Subject: Grammar
>
> Gabriele,
>
> Yep, you've picked out two of my favourite gripes.
>
> However, I guess we'll have to accept that 'lay' and
> 'lie' will merge in English (much like 'sitzen' and
> 'setzen' remain distinct in German but both have
> become 'sit', at least in the sense of people sitting,
> in English).
>
> However our newly-formed Orthography Hell should
> indeed be extended to a Grammar Hell include those who
> see fit to use 'didn't use(d)'...!!!
>
> My personal gripe numero uno is people saying 'He's
> stood over there' as opposed to 'He's standing over
> there'. Using the past participle indicates to me that
> someone is forcibly holding the person there - which
> is somewhat unlikely in most cases.
>
> And then there are people who say 'between you and I'
> as a hypercorrection...
> And people who say 'Barcelona' with a lisp on the
> <c>...
>
> Something about 'cans' and 'worms' springs to mind...
>
> Having said all that, linguistic change is generally a
> force for the good (or at least for simplification),
> so we all just have to accept it.
>
> Except in the 'Barcelona' case, of course...
>
> Kind regards,
>
> =====
> ------------------
> Ian James Parsley
> www.ianjamesparsley.net <http://www.ianjamesparsley.net>
> +44 (0)77 2095 1736
> JOY - "Jesus, Others, You"
>
> ----------
>
> From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
> Subject: "Grammar"
>
> > From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de
<mailto:globalmoose at t-online.de>>
> > Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2003.02.25 (08) [E]
> >
> > Since it seems to be free-for all griping time right now, I'm eager not
to
> > miss the moment and vent my two chief gripes about violations of
> > the English
> > language:
>
> What do you mean by "violations of the English language"?
> How can a language be "violated"?
>
> The examples you quote just seem to be natural variations.
> Or do you mean that the English in grammar books is somehow
> "pure"? I'm more inclined to think that grammarians'
> recommendations contain things that are worse than anything
> you've quoted, such as "my wife and I" where in English it's
> much more normal (and historically more supportable) to say
> "me and my wife". Or think of Strunk and White's ridiculous
> treatment of apostrophe placement in genitive plurals (which
> unfortunately is now considered the right way to do it).
>
Sandy

Dear Lowlanders,
Language change is natural and inevitable, but I suppose it is
also natural and inevitable that most of us feel discomfort when it
changes too fast. Printing may have exerted a conservative influence on
language change, but I suspect that television has the opposite effect,
since it mostly depicts the younger generation using the trendiest
colloquial speech.
It is among the younger generation that we find the current state
of the language, and the seeds of future change. We have indeed lost the
transitive/intransitive distinction in the word pairs lie/lay and sit/set.
Ironically, in the former the transitive has supplanted the intransitive,
while in the latter the reverse is true. Oh, yes- I'm hearing people say,
"Please sit that on the table" and "Sit yourself down".
Regarding pronouns, "whom" is completely gone, and I predict that
the rest of the nominative/objective case distinctions will be lost.
Widespread usages like "Me and my wife went to the store" and "Between you
and I" demonstrate that rules governing the objective case are not being
learned. Such speech is heard increasingly often on TV, especially on
reality shows, and that serves to reinforce the patterns.
"Used to" is a collocation that might well be on its way to
becoming a single word.
Another change, not yet mentioned, can be seen in the subjunctive.
Where I would say "If I had gone, I would have had a good time"
many folks are saying "If I would have gone, I would of had a good time."
Well, this contains a double whammy... the subjunctive protasis has been
replaced by the "would" phrase appropriate to the apodosis, and the "have"
in the compound verb, always abbreviated in speech, has been misanalyzed
as "of". No kidding! I see "would of" and "could of" in about a third of
the student papers.
These things are happening, whether we like it or not.

With apologies for my own errors,
Allison Turner-Hansen

----------

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

As far as I am aware, outside official prescription (i.e., Standard English)
phrases like "I lay me/myself down" and "sit you/yourself down" are as old
as the hills. You can find them preserved not only in various dialects but
also in songs that go back a long way. Off the top of my head I remember
"Sit you down, dear companions, sit you down for a while" in some old Irish
mariners' song, and in Scots "A'd lee/lay me doun/doon an dee" ("I'd lay me
down and die" ... in a well-known song, but I forgot which one).* This is,
of course, echoed not only in Scots but also in other languages and thus
seems to be a "natural" process: transitive verb with a pronoun as the
object. We find it in German (_Bitte setzen Sie sich!_ "please sit
you(rself)!" = 'Please take a seat!', _Ich setze mich hin/nieder_ 'I sit me
down', _Leg' dich hin/nieder_ 'Lay you down' = 'Lie down') and Lowlands
Saxon (Low German, _Sett di daal!_ 'Sit you down', besides _Gah sitten_ "go
to sit" = 'Take a seat', _Ik legg mi maal up 't Ohr_ "I lay me once on the
ear" = 'I'll have a lie-down', 'I'll have a nap'). It's also most common in
Romance languages. The beginning of an old Portuguese ballad comes to mind:
_Senta-te aqui, o Antonio, senta-te aqui ao meu lado nesta cadeirinha nova!_
'Sit (you(rself)) here, o Antonio, sit (you(rself)) here by my side on this
new little stool!'

Allison wrote (above):

> Another change, not yet mentioned, can be seen in the subjunctive.
> Where I would say "If I had gone, I would have had a good time"
> many folks are saying "If I would have gone, I would of had a good time."
> Well, this contains a double whammy... the subjunctive protasis has been
> replaced by the "would" phrase appropriate to the apodosis, and the "have"
> in the compound verb, always abbreviated in speech, has been misanalyzed
> as "of". No kidding! I see "would of" and "could of" in about a third of
> the student papers.

I can absolutely attest to that. It's becoming so frequent that many instruc
tors don't even bother to correct each occurrence, but only write a general
note, or they write something like "Grammar!" next to the offending phrase.

> These things are happening, whether we like it or not.

Simple words of wisdom indeed!

Regards,

Reinhard/Ron

*P.S.: I remember the song now, retrieved from the depth of memory from my
teen years (written here in the usual Anglicized orthography):

ANNIE LAURIE

Maxwellton braes are bonnie,
Where early fa's the dew,
An' it's there that Annie Laurie
Gi'ed me her promise true,
Gi'ed me her promise true,
Which ne'er forgot will be,
And for bonnie Annie Laurie,
I'd lay me doon an' dee.

Her brow is like the snowdrift,
Her neck is like the swan,
Her face it is the fairest
That e'er the sun shone on.
That e'er the sun shone on,
And dark blue is her eye,
But for bonnie Annie Laurie,
I'd lay me doon an' dee.

Like dew on the gowan lying,
Is the fa' o' her fairy feet;
An' like winds in a summer sighin',
Her voice is low an' sweet,
Her voice is low an sweet,
An' she's a' the world to me,
And for bonnie Annie Laurie,
I'd lay me doon and dee.

================================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.
 =======================================================================