LL-L "Language varieties" 2004.04.30 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 30.APR.2004 (03) * 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: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
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: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: "Language varieties" [E]

> From: Montgomery Michael <ullans at yahoo.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2004.04.22 (14) [E]
>
> British Isles (so could just as easily come to North
> America -- and the Appalachians -- from southern
> England) or are so widespread in the U.S. that there
> is little point in calling them "Highland English" on
> this side of the water.  So while most are bonafide
> terms in the southern mountains, there in little point
> in claiming they represent the southern Highland
> linguistic inheritance from north Britain.

As a Scots speaker, I actually find it very hard to see any evidence of
Scots influence in Appalachian speech or writings at all. It seems rather to
be full of features from the south west of England. So is general American
speech, but Appalachian has more. It does make me wonder why linguists
rarely seem to even mention Wessexian when discussing American speech. Are
they just not aware of those dialects of England? I also wonder what
American linguists mean by "Scots-Irish"? It seems to be a way of being
vague more than anything else.

However, I've mentioned this before - you might want to check some of my
previous postings:

http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0012A&L=lowlands-l&P=R522
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0110B&L=lowlands-l&P=R1110
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0206C&L=lowlands-l&P=R4523

I wouldn't myself trust a researcher in American forms of English who
concentrates on Scots forms, even less if he uses an umbrella term like
"Scots-Irish". He needs to show that he's well aquainted with the English of
the south west of England before he can be considered competent in analysing
American Englishes.

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