LL-L "Language politics" 2004.12.14 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 14.DEC.2004 (02) * 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 politics" [E]

> From: Tom Carty <cartyweb at hotmail.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2004.12.13 (02) [E/German]
>
> About 50% of the Irish MEPs are fluent Gaelic speakers, so I expect that
> they will tune in. Two out of Northern Ireland MEP's are staunch Gaelic
> supporters, so I expect them to be favourable to this too.
>
> It is a good development, that small nations like Ireland cannot be
ignored,
> especially as we are not a bastard-nation (ie. a nation who evolved as a
> result of a deposed colonial power), but a native one.
>
> This is one of the services I would be happy to pay for, as a taxpayer.
>
> It is a national right. Indeed many more languages should be included,
amny
> from the Germanic strain discussed on this listserve.

I was at a conference on Deaf Advocacy in Cardiff yesterday and there was a
woman there from the Irish Deaf Advocacy organisation.

Of course she had her own relay interpreter with her so that for her the
interpretation went from British Sign Language to English to Irish Sign
Language and back.

She said that traditionally there are said to be 4,000 deaf or HoH people in
the Irish Republic altogether, but an investigation showed that there are
more likely about 16,000, not including those developing a hearing loss over
the age of 65.

BSL and ISL are both officially recognised by the British government, since
ISL is also spoken in Northern Ireland.

ISL isn't recognised by the Irish government at all. Sinn Fein was the only
party in the Irish Republic to promise support for ISL and the unexpected
number of seats won was put down to the fact that deaf people were voting
for them. However, a survey of deaf people in the Irish Republic revealed
that deaf people didn't know Sinn Fein were in support of ISL, because
information on the subject was only available in Irish and English, not in
ISL.

So we need even more taxation to sort out the languages of the Irish
Republic!

Sandy
http://scotstext.org/

----------

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

Hi, Sandy!

Great to "hear" from you again.

So, for us more or less hearing folks, could you just clarify how much of a
link there is between spoken, written and signed languages?  I'm asking this
in regards to levels of independence.  I assume that sign languages are more
or less independent of spoken and written languages, can thus be used by
speakers of various languages in a given country.  Thus, Irish Sign Language
would be the same in English, Irish and Scots environments (in the
Republic), British Sign Language would be used irrespective of the user's
environment being English, Welsh, Cornish, Scots or Gaelic.  Is this
correct?  What about the Channel Islands?  Was French Sign Language ever
used there?  (If it was it has probably been replaced by BSL by now.)

In the Netherlands, I suppose everyone uses Netherlands Sign Language, even
if they live in predominantly Low-Saxon-, Frisian-, Zeelandic- or
Limburgish-speaking environments.  Is this correct?

Sorry to bug you in case some of this duplicates your work in educating us.

I hope I don't come across as patronizing when I restate that I very much
welcome inclusion of relevant (and background) sign language information
here and at our forthcoming 10th anniversary site.  I truly believe that
Lowlands-based sign languages ought to be looked at as a part of the
linguistic makeup and that they can teach us a lot about looking at language
in different ways.  Obviously I know that you are something of a sign
language representative on this list and so far have received fairly little
input and questions, and then mostly from Grietje and me.  However, I am
sure lots of other Lowlanders are "listening."

Cheers, Sandy!

Reinhard/Ron

P.S.: I'm seriously thinking about taking courses in American Sign Language
and in conversational Spanish sometime soon.  (I understand Spanish very
well but lack some grammatical and idiomatic skills, and Spanish is *very*
important in the States, especially in the West.)

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