LL-L "Language image" 2004.05.08 (03) [E]

Sat May 8 17:08:48 UTC 2004

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 08.MAY.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: Mike <botas at club-internet.fr>
Subject: LL-L "Language survival" 2004.05.04 (06) [E]

Moin, Lowlanders,

Ron wrote:

> Even in one's wildest fantasies, Basque cannot be declared a dialect of
> Castilian or French, nor could Saami ("Lapp") be declared a dialect of
> Swedish or Norwegian...

That´s exactly what the French do as you point out later:

> and declaring all minority languages
> of France dialects of French

by calling them patois (meaning gibberish), be it Basque or Wallon,
and in fact all of the world´s languages, except French. Citation (an
adventure story from the Pacific): "... and the natives whispered in their
patois..."

> Have I made myself clearer?

Yes indeed, Ron, thank you. Point taken!

Kumpelmenten,
Mike Wintzer

----------

From: Gary Taylor <gary_taylor_98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language varieties

From: Mathieu. van Woerkom
<Mathieu.vanWoerkom at student.kun.nl>
Subject: Language survival

Ruth & Mark Dreyer <mrdreyer at lantic.net> wrote:

> a list of languages preserved by the community in
spite of the
> hostility of the machinery of government.
> Erse
> Scots (Inglis)
> Welsh
> Coptic
> Fries

>I assume with 'Fries' you mean Frisian ('Frysk') as
>spoken in the
>Netherlands?
>In that case, I can hardly think of any small
>regional language which
>is
>supported better (by the machinery and the
>government).

I think I read somewhere once that Welsh was currently
the most supported minority language in the world.
Even in London many public telephones have a language
option of which Welsh is among them. I think what Ruth
and Mark were getting at was the historical facts
where Welsh (and the other languages mentioned) were
completely oppressed.

I would like to think of Welsh as one of the modern
'successes' in that it is learnt within all Welsh
schools and the number of speakers (if not the
percentage) is increasing. It would be great if we
could get to the stage where Scots and Gaelic are also
options on phones in London (and of course Cockney and
Estuary ;-), seeing as the latter are native tongues).

One of the good things about this list is that no
language variety is considered inferior - if we can
spread this ideology to a wider public then great, but
we've got our work cut out. I think 'dialectophobia'
or 'linguaphobia', depending on your viewpoint, is one
of the last prejudices not to be taken seriously. But
lists like this one are an excellent first step.

Gary

----------

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

Lowlanders,

> One of the good things about this list is that no
> language variety is considered inferior - if we can
> spread this ideology to a wider public then great, but
> we've got our work cut out. I think 'dialectophobia'
> or 'linguaphobia', depending on your viewpoint, is one
> of the last prejudices not to be taken seriously. But
> lists like this one are an excellent first step.

I seems to me that Gary spells out an important fact, and Mike echoes this
at least indirectly.

I could think of other types of prejudicial expressions that are still
publicly tolerated, but, yes, linguistic prejudices can and are definitely
still being expressed in most social circles.

Just think of the still very much current use of adjectives like
"lovely-sounding," "beautiful," "ugly," "grating," "smooth," "irritating,"
"harsh," "expressive," "colorful," "slang-like," "coarse," "complicated,"
"simple" and "primitive" in describing languages.  After just a bit of
digging and thinking you will realize that these descriptions are based on
things other than language.  Much rather, they are based on prejudices
(positive or negative) against the speakers, their cultures and their
perceived roles in politics and history, or they are associated with
activities (such as opera lovers thinking that "Italian is the queen of
languages," which is a subcategory of culture-based prejudice, of course).
They may also be perceived as being amusingly unusual but in the long run as
being insignificant, inconsquential ("weird little relics," so to speak),
which tends to be the case when it comes to lesser-known minority languages.
It has come to my attention that some Americans whom I have told about the
historical connection between Lowlands Saxon [Low German] and English tell
each other that I happen to speak a "funny, little, archaic" language that
by some weird fluke of nature survived among a handful of people (never mind
that I had made clear that it is still used by millions).  When they hear it
spoken, they find it sounds amusing, kind of "archaic and earthy."  Based on
select bits of the little information they had been given, their minds are
made up: it's an odd-sounding relic that's good for party entertainment and
is quite insignificant in the great scheme of things.  Many German speakers
of or from the north find the language very unsophisticated and "funny," a
language variety in which you get away with sounding childish and rude.  It
is perceived as "earthy" because of the knowledge that it survives primarily
in rural and proletarian circles.

In other words, I assume that we would have fewer and perhaps different
kinds of prejudices against language varieties if we were given no prior
background information about it and if we could not see the speakers'
physical appearance, attire, etc.  If you lied and for instance introduced
Lowlands Saxon as one of the most prestigeous language varieties in Europe,
a variety associated with elegant artistic expressions, I bet you most
people would tell you that they think it sounds just lovely and that they'd
love to learn it.

Regards,
Reinard/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.
======================================================================