LL-L "Orthography" 2003.10.13 (19) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 13.OCT.2003 (19) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
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: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Orthography

Dan Prohaska wrote:

> If LS speakers know one standard orthography they will ultimately find
> that reading literature from other regions is easy after. Where the
> spoken word is concerned, I would want to see everyone use his or her
> own dialect. If speakers from different regions meet they usually
> compromise.

Isn't this pretty much so in the case of Nynorsk Norwegian, where there is a
very loose standard dialect, if any, and most people write their dialects
using general orthographic devices?  I have a friend who is a Nynorsk writer
(having switched to it from Dano-Norwegian/Bokmål), and this is the way she
explained it to me.

> PS: Reinhard, I'm actually considering, as you know, switching to your
> Neo-Hanseatic orthography. One minor proposal, I dont know if you like
> it: I would spell NHG "mit" as LS <mid> for etymological reasons.
> Auslautverhärtung-rules ensures its pronunciation as /t/ anyway.

Thanks, Dan.  I feel flattered.

Well, I am certainly open to suggestion.  I know what you mean, and I admit
that initially I had the same thought.  However, although the system
utilizes traditional graphic devices, one of its fundamental principles is
"Consistency over etymology."  What I am aiming at is that people do not
need to memorize the spelling of individual words.

As far as I know, the Lowlands Saxon (Low German) word _mit_ ~ _met_ 'with'
does not alternate.  In other words, it cannot be extended by means of a
syllable that begins with a vowel, which would reveal if the final consonant
is underlyingly /d/ or /t/.  This would be the only way, because LS, like
Dutch, Afrikaans, German, etc., and like Slavonic languages, has "final
devoicing" (your _Auslautverhärtung_).  This means that a voiced consonant
at the end of a word or morpheme and before another consonant in the same
syllable becomes voiceless, e.g., /hov/ -> _hov_ (<Hoff>) [hɔf]/[hOf] ‘court
’ (but /hööv(+e)/ -> _hööv’_ (<Hööv(')>) [høːˑv]~[hœːˑv]/[hø:.v]~[hœ:.v]
'courts'), /kleid/ -> _kleyd_ (<Kleed>) [klɛɪt]/[klEIt] 'dress' (but
/kleid+er/ -> _kleider (<Kleder>) ['klɛɪdɝ]/['klEId3`] 'dresses'), /bruud/
_bruud_ (<Bruut>) -> [bruːt]/[bru:t] 'bride' (but /brüüd(e)/ -> _brüyd'_
(<Brüüd(')>) [bryːˑd]/[bry:.d] ‘brides’),  /rüg/ -> _rüg_ (<Rüch>~<Rügg>)
[rʏç]/[rYC] ‘back’ (but /rüg+en/ -> _rüggen_ (<Rüggen>) ['rʏgŋ]/['rYgN]
'backs').

Again, as far as I know, the word for 'with' does not reveal the underlying
representation of phonetic [t], and we must thus "err" on the side of
caution and consistency (and the user’s convenience) by writing _mit_ ~
_met_ rather than _mid_ ~ _med_.  Besides, this is also what happens in
Dutch (_met_), and LS thus has good and established company.

You might try and make a case for <mid> by pointing to the phrase written
<middewiel> (‘in the meantime’, ‘little by little’) in the German-based
orthographies.  However, (1) if this were underlyingly really /mid-dey-wiil/
(“with-the-while”) then I would expect the variant form *<mirrewiel> in
dialects that render /dd/ as a flap represented by <r(r)>, or (2) the
/mid.../ part (whose spelling accuracy is doubtful) can be explained as
assimilation to the following /d/.

Whichever way you turn it, there is no proof of the word for 'with' having
an underlying /d/, and it is more consistent with the system's basic
principles to spell it <mit>.

I'll post the principles of the system as soon as I get a chance.

Thanks for your support!
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.
=======================================================================