LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 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
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.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 (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

   L O W L A N D S - L * 04 December 2005 * Volume 02
=======================================================================

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.03 (05) [E]

Dear Lowlanders,

following all the discussions about language correctness vs 
on-street-changings I found out there to be two sides: the feeling one, 
represented in special by two engaged women, and the rational one with Sandy 
and Gary.

One side representing conservatism, the other one the 
'delete-to-rebuild'-league?

Is it a matter of sex? A matter of the 'little difference' between male and 
female structures? The males (mallards?? ;-) being more protagonistically, 
open for renewels and pragmatism, while the females tend to treat languages 
(and not only them) with more care?

In modern business structures this difference is used deliberately because 
of its great efficiency.

But- I'm glad that the greater part of children usually learn languages more 
from their mothers than from their fathers ;-).

Paul wrote:
> If I can chip in my own two penn'orth,
> one
> argument for maintaining a standard, at least in print, is "Think of the
> Foreigners!".  I know from my own German studies that the recent re-
> shuffle
> of German spelling has caused me some confusion.
The confusion isn't only with you and me, but obviously with those hated 
people (www.rechtschreibrat.com) causing it. The 'shuffle' was followed by a 
'reshuffle' and will be followed by a 're-reshuffle', which already has been 
announced.
To change a language deeply 'from above' seems to be a way of 
impossibilities.

Luc:
> Indeed, it will surely be forgotten by most of the people, but not by
> everybody I think. Some "gravediggers" (etymologists) will know the story.
... and this might be OK as long as they don't act as 'grave-violaters' as 
sometimes occuring in minority-languages ;-).

BTW:
on LEO I not yet could find 'to of' ;-).

Greutens/Regards

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (01) [E]


  From Sandy Fleming:

  "To me this current debate isn't about English but about the form of
  argument used on the list.

  Is it all right to dismiss Low Saxon because it's like spitting in the
  street? No it isn't.
  Is it all right to dismiss Cockney rhyming slang because it's like
  spitting in the street? No it isn't.
  Is it all right to dismiss American spelling because it's like spitting
  in the street? No it isn't.
  Is it all right to dismiss writing sentences starting with "And" and
  "But" because it's like spitting in the street? No it isn't.
  Is it all right to dismiss writing "would of" because it's like spitting
  in the street? No it isn't.

  This is why I want to encourage people to develop a proper argument
  against what they want to speak out against. Or admit that they don't
  have one!

  It is all right to say that you're not going to bring up your children
  writing "would of", but this is only an expression of intent, it doesn't
  add anything towards the argument against "would of".

  Sandy Fleming"

  Sandy,
  I would certainly not dismiss any dialect or language form because it's 
"non-standard"; in fact I believe Geordie, Scouse and and any other dialects 
of English have as much right to their own written form as Limburgish, 
Frisian and any other of the languages promoted on this list.  But a Geordie 
should not write in Geordie and expect an American, or even a Londoner, to 
know what he's on about, any more that it is reasonable to expect a standard 
Dutch speaker to follow other lowlands languages (I mean generally, not on 
this list, which is a special case).
  If we argue that whatever somebody says is right, because they said it, 
then a German speaker shouldn't! correct me when I get my cases mixed up or 
use the wrong verb ending.  That is of no use to me, I *want* them to 
correct me.  I can't go around telling people I speak German if just speak 
something that Germans can understand, but think sounds silly.

  Paul 

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