LL-L "Syntax" 2005.03.22 (02) [E/LS]

Tue Mar 22 16:54:09 UTC 2005

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 22.MAR.2005 (02) * 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 (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Ruth & Mark Dreyer <mrdreyer at lantic.net>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2005.03.21 (04) [E]

Hi, Ron:

Subject: Syntax

> This inquiry concerns a peculiar, restrictive numeral phrase construction
in
> Low Saxon (Low German).  I would like to know if any of you can add any
> information to it, also if there are similar constructions in related
> languages.

> drey stük** kouken (<dree Stück* Koken>) three pieces of cake
> twintig stük** rind (<twintig Stück Rind>) twenty heads of cattle***

> ** The plural of _stük_ 'piece' is _stükken_ (<Stücken>) or _stükker_
> (<Stücker>), but usually the singular form is used between a numeral and a
> noun, though emphatically the plural might be used where it is partitive,
> _twey stükken kouken_ (but not as a counter; e.g. *_twintig stükken
rind_).
> _Stück_ can mean literally 'piece' (partitive) or may be used as a counter
> in a few cases (as in 'heads' of cattle) when standing between a numeral
and
> the modified noun.

> (4) Are similar constructions used in other Lowlands language varieties?

I'm not sure I'm answering all of your question (or which part of it), but
this is from the Afrikaans:

'Stuks' = number (of), piece (of); [Hoeveel stuks is daar?] = [How many
(articles) are there?]; [stuksgewyse] = [bit by bit, one by one, piecemeal,
singly, separately, piece by piece]; [ Daar is 'n geselskap van
vyf-en-twintig met 'n duisend-twee-honderd stuks vee Groot Rivier oor] =
[There is a group of twenty-five with a thousand & two-hundred livestock
that crossed the Orange River.]
'Stuk' = piece
'Stukke' = pieces
'Stukgoed' or 'stukgoedere' = piece-goods or general cargo
'stukkend' = broken

Ref: GROOT WOORDEBOEK, Kritzinger et al (mostly).

It seems to me that this word is a useful & informative grammatical device,
much like the Chinese & the pigin 'piece' right?

Yrs,
Mark

----------

From: Kevin Caldwell <kcaldwell31 at comcast.net>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2005.03.21 (04) [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Syntax
>
> Dear Lowlanders,
>
> This inquiry concerns a peculiar, restrictive numeral phrase construction
> in
> Low Saxon (Low German).  I would like to know if any of you can add any
> information to it, also if there are similar constructions in related
> languages.
>
> The usual construction:
> [{num} ({counter}) {noun}]
>
> Examples:
> eyn kouken (<een Koken>) one/a (whole) cake
> twey jaren ~ jaar* (<twee Jahr(en)*) two years
> veyr kinder (<veer Kinner>) four children
> vyv appeln (<fief Appeln>) five apples
> drey stük** kouken (<dree Stück* Koken>) three pieces of cake
> twintig stük** rind (<twintig Stück Rind>) twenty heads of cattle***
>
> NB:
> * The word for 'year' may be used in its singular form when counted.
> ** The plural of _stük_ 'piece' is _stükken_ (<Stücken>) or _stükker_
> (<Stücker>), but usually the singular form is used between a numeral and a
> noun, though emphatically the plural might be used where it is partitive,
> _twey stükken kouken_ (but not as a counter; e.g. *_twintig stükken
> rind_).
> _Stück_ can mean literally 'piece' (partitive) or may be used as a counter
> in a few cases (as in 'heads' of cattle) when standing between a numeral
> and
> the modified noun.  (It functions like the generic counters in other
> languages: e.g., Chinese 個 (个) _ge_ and Farsi/Persian دانه _dâne_,
> though
> not as extensively.)
> *** Note that, unlike the English mass noun "cattle," Low Saxon generic
> _rind_ ("bovine animal") is a countable noun.

I've always thought of "cattle" as a plural, not a mass noun. One cow (or
bull), two cattle.

> (4) Are similar constructions used in other Lowlands language varieties?

The usual English construction for cattle is "twenty head of cattle", not
"heads".

In some dialects, particularly in the American South, you will hear people
say things like, "He's six foot" rather than the standard "He's six feet
tall."  Standard English has "He's six-foot-four" alongside "He's six feet,
four inches tall."

And I think (though someone else could correct me) that the English unit of
weight known as a stone (equal to 14 pounds) is normally not pluralized, as
in, "He weighs twelve stone."

Also, English uses the singular form when number phrases are used
attributively.  Compare:

The boy is twelve years old.
He is a twelve-year-old boy.

That pole is ten feet long.
That is a ten-foot pole.

That building has 30 floors (stories).
That is a 30-floor (30-story) building.

He contributed 100 dollars.
He made a 100-dollar contribution.

Speaking of money, I've heard that the EU wants English speakers to use the
construction "20 euro" rather than "20 euros".  Is this true?  If so, has it
caught on, or do most people say "euros" anyway?  I think most Americans
would say "euros" just out of spite - we've resisted the metric system all
this time, so I don't think we'd put up with some foreign bureaucrats
telling us how to talk. ;)

Kevin Caldwell

----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2005.03.21 (04) [E]

Leeve Reinhard,

Du hesst schreeven:

> Wou veel rinder hebt jy up d'n hov?
> (<Woveel Rinner hebbt ji up'n Hoff?>)
> How many heads of cattle do you have on the farm?
>
> Also:
> Wou veel stük rind hebt jy up d'n hov?
> (<Woveel Stück Rind hebbt ji up'n Hoff?>)
> How many heads of cattle do you have on the farm?

Bi uns seggt de Lüüd:
"Wouveel Kopp Veih hevvt Ji op 'n Hoff?"

> Answer in either case:
> Üm un by twey hunnerd (stük).
> (<Üm un bi tweehunnert (Stück)>)
> Around two hundred (heads).

"Stükker wat twei hunnerd."

> Wou veel appeln hest noch oever?
> (<Woveel Appeln hest noch över?>)
> How many apples do you have left?
>
> Possible answers:
> (1)
> Twey appeln.

Bi uns:
"Twei Appel*s*."

> Wou lang is hey nu al in Amerika?
>
> Possible answers:
> (1)
> Man eyrst so wat üm twey jaar (~ jaren).
> (<Man eerst so wat üm twee Jahr (~ Jahrn).>)
> Only for something like a couple of years.
> (2)
> Man eyrst so wat üm jaarner twey.
> (<Man eerst so wat üm Jahrner twee.>)
> Only for something like a couple of years.

(2) waard opp düsse Oort ne meir bruukt, man- ick hevv door van höört. Wi
schullen woll seggen: "Man eerst/ jüst eben bi Johren twee."

> (1) In the constructions [stükker {num}] and [jaarner {num}] I don't feel
> comfortable going beyond 10 or at most12.  I could see higher numbers
> used,
> but I'm not sure.  Is it only me, or is that a rule?

Ick bün ne heel seker, man- mi dücht, bit (deerken) 12 meent "Stükker" de
genau' Tool. Waard dat meer (as boven bi dat "Veih"), de ick seggen "Stükker
*wat*...", in de Meen'n van "ongefeihr", "komt ne opp eenen an".

Greutens/sincerely

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

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

Thanks for the responses (so far), guys.

Thanks also for the correction re "head of cattle," Kevin.  I don't know
what possessed me to use the plural.  I should have known better, but I was
tired and -- you know how it goes -- the more you analyze usually automatic
stuff in your head the less sure you become.

And Jonny, of course, groten Dank.

> Ick bün ne heel seker, man- mi dücht, bit (deerken) 12 meent "Stükker" de
> genau' Tool. Waard dat meer (as boven bi dat "Veih"), de ick seggen
> "Stükker
> *wat*...", in de Meen'n van "ongefeihr", "komt ne opp eenen an".

Tja, my dücht, dat is 'n goud verklaren.

Folks, Jonny believes that under 12 this [stükker {num}] construction
denotes exact numbers while above 12 you need to insert _wat_ ("what" =
"something like" = "approximately") before the numeral and make it an
estimate.  I guess this would explain why I felt reluctant using the basic
construction with numerals above 12.  I think Jonny is right.  When I insert
_wat_ it feels grammatical with any number.  So, we need to write this into
the rule then.  If we go above 12 we need to use [{num}(stük)] for a precise
number.  Interesting, and kind of weird, isn't it?  I vaguely remember that
something similar goes on in Yiddish, but I can't tell exactly what off the
top of my head.

Mark:

> It seems to me that this word is a useful & informative grammatical
> device,
> much like the Chinese & the pigin 'piece' right?

Exactly, Mark.  In China Coast Pidgin, a.k.a. as Chinese Pidgin English
(which has mostly Chinese, English, Hindi and Portuguese ingredients and
Chinese structure, which donated to general English phrases like _long time
no see_ < Chinese 好久不見 Mandarin _Hao3 jiu3 bu2 jian4_), the use of _pisi_ (<
piece) is mandatory with any number, following the use of the generic
Chinese counter word 個 (个), Mandarin _ge_, Yue (Cantonese) _go3_, Min
(Hokkien) _geo4_, Wu (Shanghainese) _ge_, etc., whose etymological origin is
"individual."  My guess is that it correspond to _pisi_ in CCP because
"piece" was most important in counting due to the nature of Sino-British
contacts, being dominated by trading, and "piece" is the closest English
equivalent of a generic counting word.

CCP:
_wan-pisi haws_ one house
_wan-fela man_ one man

Chinese:
一個房子 _yi ge fangzi_ this house
一個/位人 _yi ge/wei ren_ this person

If I remember correctly, the preferred counter for humans, or animate
objects in general, is _fe(i)la_ (< fella < fellow).  As in Chinese, CCP
_pisi_ and _fe(i)la_ are not only used with numerals but also with _dis_
'this' and _dat_ 'that'; e.g.,

CCP:
_dis-pisi haws_ this house
_dis-fela man_ this man

Chinese:
這個房子 _zhe ge fangzi_ this house
這個/位人 _zhe ge/wei ren_ this person

All this has carried over into other English-based pidgins, especially those
of Oceania, such as Tok Pisin (_pela_ for all objects), Vanuatu Pidgin
(_fala_ for all objects) and Australian Pidgin (_fela_ for all objects).

Tok Pisin (Papua-New Guinea):
_wan-pela haus_ one house
_wan-pela man_ one man
_dis-pela haus_ this house
_dis-pela man_ this man
_samting etpela kam man bilong longwe ples_ about eight foreign tourists

It then spread to most monosyllabic adjectives; e.g.,

Tok Pisin (Papua-New Guinea):
_tupela grinpela diwai_ two green trees
_tripela yangpela wel pik_ three wild pigs
_planti switpela pikinini bilong diwai_ lots of sweet fruit ("children of
tree")

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