LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.05.20 (07) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 20.MAY.2005 (07) * 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: Þjóðríkr Þjóðreksson <didimasure at hotmail.com>
Subject: Language varieties


Hi Ingmar!

like <u>
>vs
><jou>

Gij and u(w) were also very usual among the Hollandic elite f that time.
Probably they have indeed come there from the Flemish tongues, but that's
not the point.
It's about words that 1) do NOT belong to the Hollandic elite language and
that 2) come from Flanders/Brabant. So it's not about words that they did
already use themselves, as it's normal that they integrate those in the
standard language.

<werpen> vs <gooien>

I guess here gooien is your Flemish variant? I haven't uttered the word
werpen for several years I guess, but I'll hardly write gooien. And I cannot
remember having seen it in a book yet! (and I thought I was a literate guy,
for my age ;))

<schoon> vs <mooi>

Btw, I didn't deny the existance of those words, just that they were not so
frequent. On the other hand, this is also only just a theory. It's not
always clear who you can trust.
As you've lived in Brabant for several years, and your wive comes from
there, I wanted to ask you something: how strong are gij and schoon still
these days? The North Brabanders that I've seen on TV all spoke some very
AN'ish language, free of any dialectical terms (whereas Belgian Brabanders
will make a huge mix of both systems, often even on TV or in formal
situations).
My father's girlfriend, who is from NB, talks something that sounds very
much North Netherlandic to me, mooi, jij, jou, and the pronunciation and
stuff, but one thing she often uses when she's talking informally, that is
the diminutive in -ke, in Belgium one will rather keep 'gij/ge' instead but
use the '-tje' forms.

Anyway.

Hi Criost???r

Our plane arrived at Shannon airport, and we drove a rented car all the
time. We've spent the days in Kerry, Clare and on the Arran Islands (and
some hours in Galway city).
For letting me hear some Gaelic (my father knows my interests) he put on
RnaG (Radio na Gaeltacht), apparently the only radio broadcasting in the
language. It sounded very guttural to me, a bit like Hebrew or Arabic, at
least when the native Gaels spoke (many a speaker had a clear native English
accent).
But they were just talking about things we didn't understand, and that for
hours long, not like anything that could interest the youth, and not much
music either.
My dad joked that they were ruining their own language by having this radio.
Maybe there is some truth in his idea. With boring talking and only folk
music (which I myself love though) which is often badly played, you won't
have the youth listen to the Gaelic radio but to some moderner, English
radios.
The first 3 days I heard not one person talking Gaelic. We were driving
through Kerry, climbed (clumb?) the Carrá® Tuathail/Carrauntoohill (the
highest mountain of the country), and sat in a lot of pubs. But no Irish at
all. Although some things at the side of the roads indicated we entered the
Gaeltacht. (the English place-names under the Irish ones gave a nice idea of
how to pronounce the upper ones, that was also interesting. :))

Then we went to Doolin, I heard one couple there that talked Gaelic to one
another. A man in the pub was telling to some tourist what a pitty it was
the language had disappeared to heavily. He had a strong accent so maybe he
was a speaker to. But on 4 days only 3 speakers out of thousands, at the
Westcoast, where it's said to stand strongest?

We sailed to Inis Mó²¬ there there seemed to be pretty much more Gaelic,
although I didn't hear anyone talking it to someone else. The woman at the
museum of the D?nghasa pronounced a few words though by request of my
father.

The last day, we drove to Galway (Gaillimh if I remember correctly?
Pronounced as Galliw or Galliv or something?) as my dad knew a good
bookstore there (I had told him I wanted to buy a good book about either Old
or New Irish before it was too late - over here they're even harder to
find).
I came home with an old book about Middle Welsh and one about Middle English
(all very nice by the way). No Gaelic book in my bag! Another disappointing
thing, I had expected that there would be a lot more interesting and
worth-buying books about Gaelic in the shops!
I will have to wait, I think :p

P.S. yes there were a few courses Gaelic available, but as the back-cover
already mentioned things like "the easiest way to learn Gaelic without any
difficult therms" and that kind of stuff, no thorough grammar either, I'm
not looking for simple books but things that learn me how to create new
things instead of copying sentences that you can use in the post-office, the
bakery, ...
But teaching decent grammar seems to be the lack of any modern language
study. Even at school here.

Diederik Masure

>From: Cræshy;ostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
>Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.05.19 (09) [E]
>
>Diederik Masure wrote:
>"I hope I can post my linguistic comments on my 5-day trip to
>Ireland soon!"
>
>I hope so, too. Whereabouts in Ireland - north and south - did you
>(or are
>you planning to) visit? There is a wealth of linguistic interest
>here, no
>doubt about it.
>
>Go raibh maith agat,
>
>Criostóir.

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.05.20 (05) [E]

Ron wrote:
> (I often suspect that it is the official exclusion of German as a core
> language of this list that irks certain people in Germany, people who lack
> the basic knowledge and think too nationalistically to get it.)

Frankly, Ron, I respect your decision not to include it, but still, it has
always irked me, too. And I am neither nationalistic, nor do I lack the
basic knowledge.

I know that treating Lower Saxon as a separate language is near and dear to
your heart, and I can't say I disagree, but by excluding High German, the
fact that Lower Saxon is extremely close to German, after all, and that many
if not most sayings and expressions, and a lot of the vocabulary have their
direct equivalent in German, becomes obfuscated. I often find it hard to
discuss terminology when German is not included, and personally I think this
is "not right", purely for linguistic reasons. High German and Lower Saxon
are two very closely related languages (as are German and Dutch, for
example), and to draw the line right between them feels like a linguistic
Berlin wall to me.

When I say this, keep in mind that I grew up (and now live again) in a
region where High German and Platt have always been freely mixed to any
degree the speaker sees fit at the moment, not unlike Missingsch from
Hamburg (which, for some reason, is included), but different in that there
is not really a standard mixture; the amount of Platt mixed in is really up
to the speaker's current mood, and everyone is comfortable with that. This
makes the sharp division you propagate even more "unnatural" to me.

But as I said, this list is your baby and if you decide that this is where
you want to draw the line, I completely respect that. I just think that the
picture can never truly be balanced in a list centered on Lower Saxon if
High German and other closely related flavours of German are excluded (the
same is true, to a somewhat lesser extent, for Scandinavian languages).
Sometimes, forgive me for saying so, I have even been wondering whether you
might not be "suppressing" those languages on purpose because their very
close proximity to Lower Saxon does not fit too well with your idea of a
standardized Lower Saxon language (another point which gives me a headache,
because, in analogy with the recent discussion about Limburgs, I do not care
to have my language standardized, sterilized and spelled in new-fangled,
barely legible ways).

Actually, this is something I have been wanting to get off my chest for a
looong time. And I hope you do not take offense; I am not asking you to
change anything, just stating my point of view which has been emerging ever
more clearly over those years I've been on the list.

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.05.20 (05) [E]

Well, I don't think either that High German should be a core language of
the Triple L. But English also underwent certain unique changes that set
it apart, both in phonology and grammar. In the case of German it were
mainly its consonants shifts and its more archaic and preserving
character, in English the opposite: major shift of the entire vowel system
and a more modern, simplified grammar. Dutch and Low Saxon are maybe
intermediate languages between both... and Frisian too, though it has also
some of the phonetical changes of English.
English - Frisian - Low Saxon/Dutch - German would be the scale of
relatedness maybe.

I think one should not forget that it was a common (group of) Western
Germanic from which English, German, Dutch, Low Saxon and Frisian are all
derived. So to make a sharp division between German and the others is kind
of artificial, meiner Meinung nach. The common roots and the heritage
count for Deutsch too.
About the threat of German for Low Saxon: Dutch is a threat for Low Saxon
and Frisian too, and so is English for Scots, isn't it?

But as I wrote, I don't think either German is a Lowlands-list-language,
and my reservations about English as one is a bit less now. So actually,
what am I talking about, huh? Well, I just like to talk about this kinda
things...

Ingmar

> R. F. Hahn :
>>German *is* included, Ingmar, certainly its specific northern varieties,
>just not _in toto_ as a Lowlands language.  It has two important strikes
>against it: (1) it underwent certain unique changes that set it apart
(which
>is why some want to call it "Southern Germanic"), and (2) its original
area
>is outside the Lowlands.  It's a Johnny-come-lately in the Lowlands as
well
>as a catalyst for "de-Lowlandization" and thus alienation of Germany's
>Lowlands varieties from their closest relatives.  If we included it we
would
>also have to include the North and East Germanic languages, forget about
the
>Lowlands and call ourselves Germanic-L, thus compete with many other
lists.
>English and Scots, on the other hand, descended predominantly from
Lowlands
>varieties.  We are not so much concerned about which varieties are
mutually
>more or less intelligible but about the Lowlands heritage, its common
roots
>and its diverse developments.
>
>(I often suspect that it is the official exclusion of German as a core
>language of this list that irks certain people in Germany, people who lack
>the basic knowledge and think too nationalistically to get it.)
>
> Ingmar:
>> It's good to see for me maybe, because I've always had some reservations
>> about English being called a Lowlands language, to be true, and with the
>> fact it takes such an important place at this list. For me, Low Saxon,
>> Dutch and also Frisian are the real *core* Lowlands languages, and e.g
>> much more related (multiple intelligible) Modern German is excluded...

----------

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

Thanks for sharing that, Gabriele, and I hope it made you feel better.

First, let me just remind you that German and Low Saxon are mutually
intelligible to you because you have lived with them all your life.  The
average (non-linguist) South German, Austrian and Swiss cannot understand
Low Saxon, certainly not when listening to it.  I have tested this many
times.  (And my father could not understand Swabian, Bavarian, Austrian and
Swiss dialects, but he had a much easier time with Dutch.)  Low Saxon is as
alien to the Southerners asare Dutch and Afrikaans.  Especially younger
people in those parts have a slightly better chance of understanding Low
Saxon in writing simply because they have studied English.  People in the
Netherlands mostly understand German and see the connection between words
only because they have been exposed to it a lot and most of them have
studied it up to one level or other.  The average German, on the other hand,
especially one that doesn't know Low Saxon, does not understand Dutch and
Afrikaans, not even in writing.  It takes real study to "get the hang of
it," to see the connections.  So, you and others on the List need to step
back and tune in to the ordinary sense of perspective.  Most of us do not
fall into the "ordinary" range, and that includes you, Gabriele.

I still believe that the complaints of the irked ones is predominantly
emotionally based, in many cases nationalistic and/or _lokalpatriotisch_.

I think I have figured out the root of their quandary: some people in
Germany have the need to categorize the List and me (not necessarily the
same), and, being unable to think outside the box, they make up their minds
one way or another on the basis of their limited experiences and their
biases.  They can't deal with what to them seems like a contradiction: Low
Saxon = _lokalpatriotisch_ (local patriot)  vs irreverence for political
borders = _weltbürgerlich_ (cosmopolitan), probably pinko-lefto ... enough
to make their small-checkered minds want to explode.  The easiest solution
is allocation to the "weirdo" category, facilitated by the fact that I am an
expatriate, i.e., _abtrünnig_ (apostate, i.e., have been twisted by them
foreigners).   Although some, like our Ingmar, may disagree about one detail
or another, reactions at this level of antagonism and suspicion seem to be
rare, if not absent, among people in other countries.

Again:

(1)
German is *not* excluded, certainly not from discussions, and its northern
infusion, its northern-specific varieties as well as its influences on the
varieties of the north are not only tolerated but ought not be forgotten in
discussions.  I have said so many times, and I restated it here.

(2)
The name of the List is Lowlands-L, not "West-Germanic-L."  The intent is to
limit the scope to the autochtonous linguistic and cultural varieties of
what we call the Lowlands.  German began to be imported to the region in
earnest in the 17th century, and it truly affected the non-aristocratic
population, especially the indigenous population from the upper middle class
down, much later, in earnest only with the Industrial Revolution.  It is a
fact of life for North Germans and ought to be considered within that
context.

(3)
While no one can deny that nationalistic compartmentalization and
centralization as well as the encroachment of German and French have lead to
much alienation within the linguistic and cultural continuum of the
Lowlands, the purpose of the List is to offer an alternative view, namely
one that is less concerned with today's borders and administrations than
with the old continuum and with what is left of it in the wake of internal
fragmentation and state-induced alienation.  This is why we are not simply
Europe- and geography-focused but deal with the Lowlands linguistic and
cultural enclaves globally, with a non-national focus, while not ignoring
the effects of nationalization.
(For example, it is not really important if Plautdietsch-speaking Mennonites
ought to be considered German, Dutch, Frisian, Polish, Russian, Canadian or
whatever.  They are what they are or what they think they are.  We are
merely dealing with their language and culture and their place within our
focus.  Similarly, non-Mennonite Low Saxon speakers of the American Midwest
are important to us because of that link, irrespective of if they are
German, American or whatever.  However, their respective environments do
affect them and cannot be ignored.)

It is mostly this last point (3) that rubs some Germans the wrong way, not
only because German has become their first language and they have grown
loyal to it but because Germany-focused thinking has so overwhelmed their
minds through conditioning that it takes a special effort toward mental
liberation if one wants to dispense with the one-sided mindset even for a
while.  (I am not thinking theoretically here; I have lived through it
personally.  And this is why I maintain that tearing down Europe's state
borders will do little as long as there are those borders of the mind.  Have
you, too, been bombarded by thinly veiled Nazi propaganda since last week?)
I strongly suspect that, be it conscious or subconscious, many consider the
alleged exclusion of German a sort of treason, if not a secessionist
gesture.  I can understand that it is hard to wrest yourself away from such
views when Low Saxon and German have come to figure as a duo in your life.
And this is what I am referring to when I talk about "restricted vision" and
"emotional approach" resulting in kneejerk reactions despite the absence of
logical arguments.  A Turkish German lives with Turkish and German all his
or her life and comes to consider them a logical, natural duo, which is not
to say that all of us should henceforth treat Turkish and German as though
they belong to the same group, that excluding one would be reprehensible and
against nature.  However, if our focus were "Turkish Germans," then, yes,
Turkish and German would indeed be an inseparable pair.

All this is not an attempt to turn the world upside down or to turn time
back to front  It is just a way of offering an alternative angle, a look
through a different pair of glasses.  Seeing the big picture depends on
looking at things in various ways.  This is what I mean by "getting it."

Ingmar (above):

> But as I wrote, I don't think either German is a Lowlands-list-language,
> and my reservations about English as one is a bit less now. So actually,
> what am I talking about, huh? Well, I just like to talk about this kinda
> things...

And that's why we adore you so.  ;-)  I'm not really kidding or patronizing
you, Ingmar.  As far as I am concerned, one of your most endearing qualities
besides your enthusiasm is your openness.  Talking through things is
obviously your way of getting through them.  It's an open and honest
approach, especially because you are willing to shift your stance and extend
your vista, do not just talk from an entrenched position.

I stand with what I told you about English before.  Most people, especially
those outside English-speaking areas, and also most young people in
English-speaking areas, have a very one-sided, limited view of English.
English is in fact a very large animal, not only in terms of number of
speakers and power of influence.  It is to most people only what the
elephant in the ancienct Chinese parable is to the blind men that touch it
... a long thing with rough hair at the end, a wrinkly, bending hose, a
thick, wrinkly column, a large flap ...  Especially once you start delving
into non-standard English dialects and also allow the sister language Scots
to enter the equation, then take a trip down the Appalachian trail and
crisscross the American South, you'll be amazed how Lowlandic English can
be -- and that most of those French loans have Germanic Cinderella sisters.

I suppose it *is* sort of weird what we try to do: focus yet try to see the
big picture ...

Thank for your interest and support!

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