LL-L "Grammar" 2003.01.31 (06) [S]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 31.JAN.2003 (06) * 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: Sandy Fleming [sandy at scotstext.org]
Subject: "Grammar"

> From: John M. Tait <jmtait at wirhoose.co.uk>
> Subject: New Subject

Thir's aa guid questions  :)

I canna git startit on thaim athoot some backgrund first
anent the uise o "is" forenent "ar" in Scots.

Fae early Scots tae this vera day, the "-s" endin's been
uized on verbs even wi plural nouns (we'v been ower aa
this afore, as ye ken). Houanever, the verb "tae be" wis
originally a exception tae this rule, "ar" bein uized wi
plural nouns. Ower time, bi analogy wi the raiglar verbs,
"is" startit tae be uized insteed o "ar" wi plural nouns.
The war never a time whan this process wis complete, tho,
sae ye could say, wi certain caveats, that it's never wrang
tae uize "ar" wi plural nouns, even in 'clessic' Scots.

I think that in modern Scots (at onyroads wi fowk that
spaeks in a mair 'clessic' register) "is" is the mair
uizual form wi plural nouns, but that whan the'r chyce
atween 'is' an 'ar', 'ar' can be preferred for emphasis.

Sae tae ca on...

> But in written Scots ye whiles come ower phrases like:
>
> Thir ar bigger than/nor thae.

Like ye'll a jalouzed, I read the 'ar' as maist like
emphatic. Itherwice this wad be faur the maist likely
wey tae say'd:

Thir's bigger than/nor...

As an aside, it disna seem richt tae me tae end the
sentence wi 'thae'. It should be 'thame':

Thir's bigger than/nor thame.

Tae niffer the airtin here:

Thae's bigger than/nor thir.

In ither words, 'thir' corresponds grammatical tae
baith 'thae' an 'thame'.

> Nou, I wis wonderin if this shoud be juist:
>
> Thir is bigger than/nor thae.

This seems a unlikely mak in spaek. It wad aye be contrackit:

Thir's bigger than/nor thame.

> Or gin the uise o 'thir' an 'thae' wi'oot a follaein noun is
> juist a copy o
> the English syntax, an at the naitural uiss wad be somethin like:
>
> Thir anes is bigger than/nor thae anes

This disna seem naitral tae me as juist 'Thir's bigger
than/nor thame.' It's aa richt tae say 'thir anes' an
'thae anes', an ye will hear it, but the 'anes' is
redundant. I'd say insteed, that in the forms 'this
anes' an 'that anes' the 'anes' is uized for tae
indicate the number, but this isna nott wi 'thir' an
'thae'.

> actually no a Scots construction ava, an is thare aye somethin -
> like a noun
> (eg: Thae mannies is jyners) wi 'anes' whaur the'r nae ither noun
> nott (Thae
> anes is jyners) at shoud come efter Thir/Thae, or atween thaim an
> the verb,
> juist like it dis wi This an That?

The arna aye a noun. Of course, gin the referents is
praisent, the options increases, an it's aa a maiter
o clarity an context. Aa o thir's fine:

Thir's better than thame.
Thir anes is better than thae anes.
Thir ar better, arn't they?
Thay'r no bad.  (pairsonal pronoun contact form)
Thae's no bad.
Thae anes isna bad.
Thir's better than thir.  (pyntin at referents)

As weel as wi the verb "tae be" ye'll hear thir uized
wi auxiliaries:

Thir'll dae fine.
Thae'll dae fine. (this micht be 'Thay'll dae fine' but I
                   dout bi analogy wi 'Thae's no bad' it
                   could juist as aesy be 'Thae'll', an
                   indeed it can 'feel' like 'thae' even
                   if the pronunciation's the same.)

Wi ither verbs, houaniver, I dout it's mair like the
noun'll be uized:

Thir gauns fine wi my coat.
Thir shuin gauns fine wi my coat.

's baith fine because presumably the spaeker is in an
acual situation and the listener can see the referents.

But this:

Thir comes twice a month.

seems a lot less familiar, tho I dout juist wi hou the
sitiation wad be less likely - the referents is mair
like tae be absent than praisent, an sae ye'd be mair
like tae want tae pit the noun in.

Sandy
http://scotstext.org/

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