LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.12.06 (02) [D/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)
=======================================================================

06 December 2005 * Volume 02
=======================================================================

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

[English below]

Lieve Laaglanders,

Het Nederlandse reflexieve voornaamwoord _zich_ verwondert mij, omdat het 
tegenstrijdig met _ik_ schijnt. Het zou ofwel _ik_ en *_zik_ ofwel *_ich_ en 
_zich_  moeten zijn (als Nedersaksisch _ik_ en _sik_ of Duits _ich_ en 
_sich_ of Limburgs _ich_ en _zich_). Wat is hier gebeurd? Zijn _ik_ en 
_zich_ onder oorspronkelijke Hollandse en Vlaamse dialecten normaal of werd 
een foutje tijdens standaardisering gemaakt?

Vriendelijke groet,
Reinhard/Ron

Dear Lowlanders,

The Dutch reflexive pronoun _zich_ puzzles me, because it seems inconsistent 
with _ik_ 'I'.  It should be either _ik_ and *_zik_ or *_ich_ and _zich (as 
in Low Saxon _ik_ and _sik_ or in German _ich_ and _sich_ or Limburgish 
_ich_ and _zich_).  What happened?  Is _ik_ and _zich_ normal among original 
Hollandish and Flemish dialects, or was a mistake made during 
standardization?

Friendly regards,
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.
======================================================================