LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.16 (03) [E/LS]

Sat Oct 16 17:29:01 UTC 2004

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 16.OCT.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: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (13) [E]

 Kenneth Rohde Christiansen:
> My dialect does not have [ai]; it has [E.I].  It and Groningen [A.I]
> (spelled _aai_ in Dutch-based conventions) belong to the North Saxon
> phonetic variant range represented by ANS <ey>.

>>>>>Aha, what is your dialect Kenneth? (Ingmar)

 Ron/Reinhard:
>  Ingmar, Kenneth, I'd be quite willing to consider using <ii> for [i:].
>  After all, it's the oldest written form (from which <y> and <ij>
> developed)> > and it would be more consistent with the system:
>  And later ie was introduced since handwrittten ii looks like ü.

>>>>> Good idea, there aren't so many people anyway who write by hand
especially in dialect
(sorry: their moderspraoke), since everyone uses computers (or type
writers?).
And, same as with the other long vowels, you could use ii in closed
syllables and i- in open ones,
which would be more consistent. Just like aa > a-, ee > e-, oo > o-, uu >
u-, öö > ö-, üü > ü-.
Speaking of aa, I understand that in ANS there is no difference between
historically long aa
and short a that became long later. So between Dutch LS schaop [sxO:p] and
water [va:tR]etc.
which are pronounced differently in most dialects, except for a minority of
Gronings and Northern Drenthish.
By the way, in DLS we have in most dialects the sound [Ij] or [ej], spelled
ij, i'j or i-j (I use ij)
in words like mij [mIj] = me, bakkerij [bak@"rIj] = bakery, spijen [spIjjN]
= spit, nij [nIj] = new.
(Ingmar)

> Regarding to z or s. Most Middle-age Low Saxon texts that I have read  use
s where Dutch use z.
> > Regards, Kenneth

>>>>> True, but we are speaking about an orthography for MODERN not MIDDLE
AGED Lower Saxon.
In Dutch Lower Saxon (and St Dutch) the initial s- = [s] and initial z- =
[z], these are not the same sounds just
spelled different... (Ingmar)

> In any event, it would be no problem to the reader, just as it is no
problem
> to the listener.  We are dealing with an orthographic *system* here, not
> with creating a standard dialect.
> Regards,  Reinhard/Ron

>>>>>Doar kö'j wel iens geliek an hebben Reindert! [dO:@ köjj vEl i:~s x@
"lik an hEM "rEindRt]
Lit.: you might be right Ron, but this expression mostly is used when
someone isn't totally convinced yet but
is ready with discussing for the moment ;-}   Goed blieven gaon! Ingmar
[xu:t bli:bM xO:~ "INmar]

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (13) [E]

> > Regarding to z or s. Most Middle-age Low Saxon texts that I have read
use
> s where Dutch use z.
> > > Regards, Kenneth
>
> >>>>> True, but we are speaking about an orthography for MODERN not MIDDLE
> AGED Lower Saxon.
> In Dutch Lower Saxon (and St Dutch) the initial s- = [s] and initial z- =
> [z], these are not the same sounds just  spelled different...

What's more: Middle-age LS texts will also have c- = k, -ck = -k/kk and v- =
f.
So if one wants to be consistent, like using s- = [z] because of Middle aged
spellings, one should also use
c- and v-, don't you think? But ANS has k, kk and f here. Spellings like:
Ick can dyn snacken nich verstaan [Ik kan di:n SnakN nIx f@  "StO:n] would
be justified by this Middle age based
idea  like preserving s- for [z]...
ANS doesn't want to be too German based, so feyr [fei@] with f for German
vier [fi:@] (4) like fiiv [fi:f] for German fünf [fymf] (5),
and like its own pronunciation.German based spelling would be _veer_  of
course, with initial v- .

In DLS/Dutch Lower Saxon (except for the Stellingwarfs, heavily influenced
by Frisian) initial v- is pronounced [v] like in Dutch.
So vere ["ve:r@] = Dutch vier [vi:r] 4, vieve ["vi:v@] = Dutch vijf [vEif]
5.
Only when this v is followed in Dutch bij r or l, DLS pronounces f :
vlegen/vliegen ["fle:gN]/[fli:gN] = Dutch vliegen ["vliG@].
Same with z: Standard Dutch cluster zw is DLS [sv]: zwort/zwart
[svOt]/[svat] = Dutch zwart [zvart].
In those positions DLS could spell: fliegen/flegen and swart/swort in stead
of vliegen and zwart like in St Dutch.

By the way, I'd like to state that I don't want to attack ANS, I'm just
trying to sharpen it, looking from a different background.
Ingmar

----------

From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen at gmail.com>
Subject: Orthography

Wordlist:

twij (twee)
nij (nieuw)
bakkerij (bakkerij)
ain (een)
zail (touw)
zaail (zeil)
braif (brief)
nait (niet)
bain (been)
gain (geen)
daip (diep)
gaait (gaat)
baaide (beide)
ofschaaid (afschreid)
lainen (lenen)
kaizen (kiezen)
kaaizer (keizer)
hail (heel)
haail (hail als in 'hail de zeil'; alle zeilen bijzetten)
hait( heet)
wait (weet)
allain (alleen)
hai (hij)
zai (zij)
draaien
kraaien
maaien
naaien
zaaien
waaien
daaien
aaien
graaien
zwaaien
laaien
paaien
raaiemeien
taaien
arbaaiten

Looking at this we see that where Gronings has ai, Dutch has ee, ie
(or aa, paard, gaat). Where Gronings has aai Dutch has ei or aai.
Normally I have been writing ey for the ai and the -ij (auslaut) (I
wondered about writing -y where it is actually a diphtongued y; ny,
bakkery) and used ay for th aai.

Thus: Sey gayt mit My naar de bakker(e)y um der wat brood en kouk te kopen.

Searching on google looking for ei in German orthographies where
Gronings has aai, I have found sentences as (I tried including words
with ee ([EI], where Gronings has ai):

Mi Dank geit an d'Arbeit
Do dät sick de Kaiser so bedanken vör em
An Heben seil de stille Maan, Wi segen wo he leep Un snacken, wo de ...
Sowiet klappt dat ock (fast) allnt, bit Chefkoch den Beiefrachter afscheit.
...
Da trecket se beide na den neggsten Ohre in dat Wertshus
un he geit in de Kücke, un helpt den Kock de Broden dreien

Kenneth

----------

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

Ingmar (above):

> What's more: Middle-age LS texts will also have c- = k, -ck = -k/kk and v-
> = f.

In medieval texts you will also find the same word spelled about three
hundred different ways, sometimes written by the same writer and within the
same piece, even two or three different ways of spelling within the same
sentence.  This gets more confusing the later the texts were written, which
happens to coincide with the increase of German influence in Germany and
with Frankicized Dutch influences in the Netherlands.

Ingmar, we aren't talking about what you can find here and there in the
inconsistencies of old texts to shoot at the idea as ammunition.  What we
*are* talking about is a system based on the very basic principles/ideas of
a system that all the dialects (as well as Dutch and Flemish) used to have
in common.  This does not mean writing "medieval" or anything like that.  It
merely uses a basic idea resource that is native and that fell by the
wayside especially in the wake of Germanization (and remember that the
larger percentage of dialects have been used under German domination) and in
part in the wake of French and other Romance influences on Low Franconian.

Besides, if you go back and look more carefully this time you will notice
that we do write _v-_ and not _f-_ for morpheme-initial [f], and we write
_-v(-)_ for [v] ~ [b] intervocalically and word-finally; e.g., vrind
[frI.nt] ~ vrynd (> vriind?) [fri:nt] ~ vründ [frY.nt] 'friend', wyv (>
wiiv?) [vi:f] 'woman', 'wife', wyver (> wiver?) ['vi:v3(r)] ~ ['vi:b3`]
'women', 'wives', vaken ['fQ:kN=] 'often', veyver ['fE.Iv3(r)] ~
['fa.Iv3(r)] ~ ['fE.Ib3`] ~ etc. 'fever', varken-vleysch ['fa:kN=flE.IS] ~
['farkN=flE.Is(x)] ~ ['farkN=flE.Isk] ~ etc. 'piglet's meat', vygelyn (>
vigeliin?) [fige'li:n] 'violine', Vlaamsch [flQ:mS] ~ [flQ:ms(x)] ~
[flQ:msk] ~ etc. 'Flemish', Vreyse ['frE.Ize] ~ Vreys' ['frE:Iz] ~ [fra:Iz]
'Fries' ('Frisian person'), Vrankryk (> Vrankriik?) ['fra.Nkri:k] 'France',
vynen Vranschen wyn (> vinen Vranschen wiin) [,fi:n:,fra.nSn='vi:n] ~ etc.
'fine French wine', old-vranksch ['?o.ltfra.NkS] ~ etc. ("Old Frankish" =)
'oldfashioned'.

<F> occurs only in non-nativized loanwords and proper names (e.g., Franz,
Frans, Frankfort, Finland).

Kumpelmenten,
Reinhard/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.
======================================================================