LL-L "Language acquisition" 2005.09.21 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 21.SEP.2005 (03) * 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: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: "Language acquisition" [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn <lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net>
> Subject: Language acquisition
>
> This is why I would never recommend textbooks that do not cover such
> aspects, such as some for Scandinavian and South Slavonic languages, or
> Russian or Ukrainian textbooks that do not indicate primary stress (which 
> is
> phonemic, i.e., unpredictable, in these languages).  Similarly, the _Teach
> Yourself Danish_ textbook does not indicate the _stød_ (a glottal
> interuption as a remnant of an old tone), and the introduction says you
> should listen to the cassettes or have Danish friends teach you.  Sorry --
> that won't cut the mustard.  Of course all these predicaments go back to
> inadequacies in the official orthographies -- but that's a different 
> matter.

It's not necessarily due to orthography - in Welsh the mutations are spelled 
just like anything else: "cadair goch" vs "ty coch" (red chair, red house), 
for example. So even just reading Welsh you have the mutations pushed in 
your face all the time.

Of course, the point is that to produce these phrases I don't think about 
gender, I'm just used to them and feel uncomfortable about the alternatives. 
In fact it wouldn't occur to me to say "*cadair coch" or "*ty goch" simply 
because I've never used such phrases - this makes for easy fluency. You're 
right of course, it's important to start with this from the beginning, 
because if you _do_ get used to using such phrases it could get pretty 
difficult to break all the bad habits - this makes for having to think about 
grammar before you can construct a sentence.

The reason why it occurs to people not to learn mutations in Welsh is that 
they don't make any difference to the meaning - though in fact they 
sometimes do. Some of the more "laid back" books for Welsh beginners (the 
kind with line drawings with everything labelled in Welsh) actually suggest 
not learning the mutations if you don't feel like it. I'd think this would 
make for uncomfortable communication, and in Welsh even uncomfortable 
reading.

Sandy
http://scotstext.org/

----------

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

Thanks, Sandy.

Actually, the case of the Danish _stød_ ([?]) seems rather similar to that 
of Welsh mutation.  True, it *is* phonemic (as I would argue Welsh mutation 
flagging is) and in a few cases it *is* the only distinguishing feature 
between two words ("minimal pairs," e.g., _hun_ [hon] 'she' vs _hund_ [hon?] 
'dog', _hinden_ ["hen=n] 'the film' vs _hinden_ ["hen?=n] 'the hind', 
_viser_ ["vi:sV] '(clock) hand' vs _viser_ ["vi:?sV] '(he/she/is) shows'). 
However, in most case context provides clarification.  In fact, most 
southern Danish dialects (on Jutish substrates) do not use this feature 
(though its use has been increasing in the wake of "meainstreaming"). 
Nevertheless, it *is* a feature in most Danish dialects, including all 
standard varieties.  Not using it while otherwise using standard 
pronunciation "doesn't sound right."

I guess another such case seems to be that of Low Saxon in Germany, where 
the absence of orthographic differentiation between /e:/ and /ei/ and 
between /ö:/ and /öü/ is leading learners to miss these difference and thus 
to mispronounce words.  (This is the bone I keep picking with Heiko, my 
argument being that a reference work like Wikipedia ought to show the 
differences.)  What happened is that the supposedly god-like Mr. Sass 
proposed an orthographic system that does allow you to make the differences 
by means of somewhat unusual diacritics, and native speakers, writing for 
each other, omitted these, since they can pronounce the words correctly, and 
the differences are usually clear within given contexts.  This watered-down 
version has been used in a couple of dictionaries, which is unpardonable, 
though most dictionaries do indicate the differences in one way or another. 
Obviously, since these are phonemic differences, reference and textbooks 
simply must indicate them to adequately serve the learner (including the 
native speaker who needs to look up previously unknown words).

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