LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (04) [E]

Lowlands-L lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Sun Dec 4 23:55:09 UTC 2005 

======================================================================
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 04
=======================================================================

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (02) [E]

Jonny wrote:
> 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.

Pu-leeze! You're building statistics based on four samples, with categories
that you made up according to your own biased gut feeling? Need I really
mention that my husband and my other male best friend feel the same way that
I described, and at least as passionately? And that the author of the famous
"Zwiebelfisch" series, who is carrying a torch for the beauty of traditional
language use, is a man? And that the person who, in Germany, has made the
most money from a blatant disregard for the language, namely one Verona
Pooth, nee Feldbusch, is as feminine as they come? Ugh.

By the way, I will be having a timeout for anywhere between three and twelve
days starting tomorrow, so please don't reply anything too provoking (I know
you were trying to bait me with your gender stereotypes) because I won't be
able to rise to the occasion. ;-)

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Jacqueline Bungenberg de Jong <Dutchmatters at comcast.net>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (02) [E]

RE: conservatisme vs laisser-faire,
Hello Lowlanders, what a wonderful free-for-all!
We may agree or disagree with some or all of the arguments given, but just
think what life would be if we were not able or free to think up arguments.

Re: Use of "to have" and "to be" as independent verbs and helper verbs.
    It is clear that the English verb "to be", the Dutch verb "zijn/wezen"
    and the German verb "sein" are a mixed bag at best. It seems that some

    of the verbal forms point more at "existence" than others. Is there any
    truth to that or are my antennas picking up something that does not
    really exist? To have seems to be "more regular", not as schizophrenic
    as to be. Does the use of "to be" as helper verb predate that of
    "to have"? Have they always coexisted like in German, Dutch and Old
    English?

It must be clear that I have spent most of my time with test tubes rather
than linguistic text books. Jacqueline

----------

From: heather rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.03 (01) [E]

Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
> but we can create/generate new sentences we have never heard before,
> that there isn't a template for.<

Actually I don't think we can!
I think Sandy's example says it all - If you can say He laughed - then it
follows that you can say She cried..... even if all you have heard before
is He laughs and She cries.

I use The 3 little Pigs story with students and take a sentence such as "
The man gave the straw to the little pig" and get them to create  new
sentences by adapting this one i.e. using the same pattern but substituting
ideas. In this way they can 'create' sentences that they have never heard -
but all the while strictly following the model sentence given.

I don't think we have it in us to 'create' a new syntax i.e. a sentence
structure we have never heard before - or that has never existed before. We
can build on old ones by melding unexpected structures together in new
combinations -  we can re-use in unexpected ways familiar structures. We
can miss things out or add extra things in

But actually create new sentences that there isn't a template for
....................

Try making one!

Heather

PS who freely admits to being the world's worst typist and whose fat
fingers usually hit more than one key or who frequently hits the letters in
the wrong order edning pu wiht wrods like this!  Sorry!
I'll try not to hit the send button before I've  ( or is that 'of' ?)
wordchecked the message.

----------

From: heather rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (01) [E]

Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
>Language is too squirmy to fit into our boxes.<

I love it!  May I use that in my next Grammar INSET!

Heather

----------

From: heather rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (01) [E]

Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
>The way I see it, "who" is acting as the object of "saw" in that case.<

Especially clear when it's written " .. the man, whom I saw yesterday"

Heather

:--)

----------

From: heather rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.04 (01) [E]

Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
>Is it all right to dismiss writing sentences starting with "And"<

If you refer to Fowler et al you will find that it is perfectly acceptable
to start an English sentence with And .... usually it has the force of
Moreover.

Another one of those half learnt 'grammar' right/wrongs and then
over-applied, like "You can never say 'me and John' or 'John and me'   and
then they come up with " Between John and I....." which has to be the most
toe-curling mistake.

Just because they haven't got a clue about the difference between subject
and direct/indirect /emphatic pronouns

Heather 

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

More information about the LOWLANDS-L mailing list