LL-L "Resources" 2004.11.11 (06) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 11.NOV.2004 (06) * 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: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Resources" 2004.11.11 (03) [E]

>>>>>Dear Henry,
You're right, the Low Saxon language knows a lot of varieties.
But I think the Northern German dialects of Niedersachsen has, or at least
had, by far the most speakers and the widest territory where is is spoken.
It's a rather homogenic variety, too, does not differ so much over a large
territory, maybe as big as the whole Netherlands.
The Dutch Low Saxon dialects are quite different from eachother and spoken
by less people, each in small parts of the North Eastern provinces.
The Westphalian varieties are not so typical, and speakers of Eastern Low
Saxon (roughly ex-DDR) will have no trouble with the Nord Niedersachsisch.
Anyway, since Low Saxon is officially recognized as a real language, there
has to be made a choice in this kind of cases when some standard of
it is asked for.
I would choose for ANS because other spellings are either too German or too
Dutch, and not easily understood by everybody.
And ANS would reflect pronunciation a lot more accurate, because it was
specially designed for Low Saxon...
That doesn't mean I would use it for my own variety of Dutch Low Saxon, but
that's only because of linguistical reasons...

Good gaon! Ingmar Roerdinkholder

> From: Henry Pijffers <henry.pijffers at saxnot.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Resources" 2004.11.11 (01) [E]
>
> Ingmar wrote:
> >
> > http://www.travlang.com/languages/index/html is the right address to it.
> >
> > But I was missing one important language here: there is no trace of Low
> > Saxon to be found of TravLang.
> >
> (Low) Saxon varies too widely, and there's no standard orthography
> (despite various attempts).
>
> > In that case, the same could be done with Low Saxon. In my opinion it
> > should be the Northern German variety, in ANS-orthography,
>  >
> Why Northern German? Why ANS?
>
> (Mind you, I'm not saying I'm opposing this, I'm only asking questions)
>
> regards,
> Henry

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