LL-L "Syntax" 2004.03.20 (01) [E]

Sat Mar 20 16:59:44 UTC 2004

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 20.MAR.2004 (01) * 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: burgdal32admin <burgdal32 at pandora.be>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.03.18 (09) [E]

> From: Jan Strunk <strunkjan at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Syntax
Hi Jan,
Here are my Flemish variants:
>
> Dear Lowlands,
> Summary:
> As far as I can tell all Low Saxon dialects have the "X sien Y"
> construction, and so have German, Dutch, Frisian, Afrikaans, and even
> Norwegian. I analyze the Low Saxon construction as a prenominal
> possessive
> construction with a possessive linking element occurring
> between the possessor and the possessum. In Low Saxon, this linker
> generally
> has the same form as the possessive construction.
> "Jan sien Huus" (Jan's house) vs. "sien Huus" (his house).
Jan zin uus / jans uus
>  The linker
> exhibits pronominal agreement with the possessor in gender and number
> and concord with the possessum in gender, number, and case. The
> possessor
> mostly occurs in the dative in those dialects that preserve it like
> Plautdietsch: "Ekj seeh äahrem Brooda siene Pead." (I see her brother's
> horses.)
'k Zie eur broers peird / 'k Zie eur broers ulder peird
> However, there seems to be something else going on in Plautdietsch,
> too,
> because the possessor is not always dative marked:
> "Mien Brooda sien Peat es jreen." (My brother's horse is green.)
Min broere zin peird is groene / Min broeres peird is groene.
> (Still have to look into this.)
> In dialects that have lost a dative vs. accusative distinction the
> possessor
> appears in the object case (which I'll call accusative). Often this
> cannot easily be seen, because case distinctions are often lost.
> But even pronouns can be used as possessors if they are stressed: "em
> sien
> book" (HIS book)
Zin boek/
Hie zin boek(sounds natural, but i don't know if it is used)
>
> The "X sien Y" is very general and versatile construction. It works
> with all
> kinds of possessors: nouns, question words, relative pronouns,
> personal pronouns, and demonstratives:
> "Min Brauder sin Peer is greun." (My brother's horse is green.)
> "well sien Hart" (whose heart)
Wiens herte / Wie(ne) zin herte
> "Dit is de Mann, den sien Huus wi sehn hebbt." (This is the man whose
> house
> we have seen.)
Da's de vint  zin uus da me gezien hèn /
> "em sien Huus" (HIS house)
zin uus (E: his house) / eur uus (E: her house)
> , "Se ehr Huus" (your house - polite form)
joen uus
> "de ehr Dackel" (those people's dachshund)
ulder nen hond
>
> Besides the "symmetric" construction with an overt possessor, the
> linker,
> and an overt possessum. You leave out either the
> possessor to get the older possessive pronoun construction "sien Huus"
> (his
> house)  or the possessum to get a pronominal
> interpretation for the possessum: "mien Brauder sien" (my brother's)
> or even
> both: "Dat is sien." (That's his.)
Dad'is 't ziene.
> There seems to be some variation in the dialects as to whether the
> construction without an overt possessum has to feature
> a special form of the possessive pronoun/linker (as English "theirs",
> etc.).
>
> Friedrich W. Neumann: Dit is Peiter siin Bauk. Peiter siin is grötter
> as
> Anna ehr’t/ehr’n. (This is Peter's book. Peter's is bigger than
> Anna's.)
Dad' is Pieter zin boek/ Dad'is Pieters boek. Pieters is groôter dan
Anna's
> Reinhard Hahn: Dit is (jüm)ehr (~ de ehr) Land. Dit is (jüm)ehr (~ de
> ehr).
> (This is their country. This is theirs.)
Dad' is ulder land. Dad' is ulders (E: theirs)
Dad'is julder land. Dad'is julders (E: yours)

> Helge Tietz: Duet is eer land. Duet is eers. (This is their country.
> This is
> theirs.)
> Reuben Epp: Dit es äah Laund. Dit es äaht. (This is their country.
> This is
> theirs.)
>
> In this context, it is interesting to look at the most grammaticalized
> variant of this construction which seems to occur in Afrikaans.
> In Afrikaans, the possessive linker (a) doesn't show any agreement,
> neither
> with the possessor nor with the possessum anymore.
> Moreover, it has a different form that both the normal possessive
> pronoun
> (b) and the "independent" possessive pronoun that is used without
> an overt possessum. Even the linker when used with a possessor but
> without a
> possessum seems to have its own peculiar form (d).
>
> (a): Haar broer se perde is swart. (Her brother's horses are black.)
Eur broere zin peirden zin zwart./ Eur broeres peirden zin zwart
> (b): Hierdie is sy broer. (This is his brother.)
'ndien ier is zin broere.
> (c): Hierdie is syne. (This is his.)
Dad'ier is zin...
> (d): Dit is hulle s'n. (This is theirs.)
Dad'is tunder/tulder
>
> Some Low Saxon dialects might be at the beginning of such a
> development:
> If  Friedrich W. Neumanns sentence: "Peiter siin is grötter as Anna
> ehr’n."
> can be used for a neuter singular referent as e.g. for "book",
> this would be interesting....
>
> For more infos please follow the links above. Last but not least, some
> interesting facts and questions...
> In an book about Low Saxon I have come across the following example:
>
> Anna ehr wegen ("because of Anna"). What do you think about this
> example?
> Would it work in your dialect?
Anna's ierentwegen...
>
> An interesting book for all people interested in possessive
> constructions in
> Germanic (like me...):
>
> Norde, M. (1997): The history of the genitive in Swedish. A case study
> in
> degrammaticalization. Dissertation. Vakgroep Skandinavische taal- en
> letterkunde. University of Amsterdam.
>
> The book gives a good overview over the different constructions in
> Germanic.
> It states that the "X sien Y" possessive construction
> in Dutch is only used with animate (or even human) referents: That is
> "Jan
> z'n huis" would be fine, but not "dit huis z'n raam".
Just the same in Flemish.
Jan zin uus / 't raom van dad'uus.
> Do you Dutch speakers out there argee? What about Low Saxon, Afrikaans,
> etc.?
> Ok, if you have any questions, complains or corrections, or new data
> (!),
> keep it comming....
> Thank you all again!
> Jan Strunk
Groetjes
luc Vanbrabant
oekene

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