LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.09.30 (07) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 30.SEP.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: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.09.30 (05) [E/LS]

Are you sure? We Dutch Low Saxon never pronounce the spelled -ven in those
cases as [v=m], but as [b=m].
It is hard to say [lE:v=m] instead of [lE:b=m], and IF the [v] were
pronounced, it would be [lE:v=n], with [=n], not [=m].
But I think I understand what you mean: in derived forms like <ik leev>
it is [v] not *[b]; you probably mean that the Meckelnborger say <ik leeb>?

Ron wrote:
>
>Like Lower Elbe dialects, Mecklenburg dialects have [b] where other
dialects
>have [v] between vowels; e.g.,
>
>to live: NS leven ["le:v=m], LE leben ["le:b=m], M läben ["lE:b=m] ~
>["læ:b=m]
>to give: NS geven ["ge:v=m], LE geben ["ge:b=m], M gäben ["gE:b=m] ~
>["gæ:b=m]
>over, across: NS över, œver ["ø:vV], LS öber ["ø:bV], M oeber, œber
["œ:bV]
>above: NS baven ["bQ:v=m], LE boben ["bo:b=m], M baben ["bQ:b=m]

Ingmar

Are you sure it is from Slavonicv? I think this -ing diminutive exist in
Danish, too, like in <kærling> etc.
Moreover, it may be related with Drenthe Low Saxon diminutive -egien etc.

Drenthe LS dim. of "man" is "mannegien". Same in Stellingwarfs (S.E.
Friesland) and Sallands (N+W Overijssel) and Veluws (N.W. Gelderland),
and Veenkoloniaals (E. Groningen) - all Dutch Low Saxon varieties.

>>From "mannegien" to "mannigen" is a small step. And "mannigen" in LS would
be pronounced easily as ["manIg=N], "mannigng". From that to "manningen"
{"manIN:], "manningng" is even still easier to imagen.

But the same is possible from the general Low Saxon diminutive -eken:

Manneken pronounced "mannekng" leads to "mannegng" => "manneng"
=> "manning".

The older Dutch dim., even before now archaic/dialectical -eken, was -ekijn
[@kin]. The "ie" in Dutch Low Saxon -egien or -echien is explained by that.
In Modern Dutch it is -je or -tje, but in colloquial Dutch, like in the
Holland/Randstad speech, -ie in stead of -je is used frequently.

Meckelnborgsch "daching" in stead of "dagging" reminds me of coll. Dutch
"dachie" for "dagje", not *"daggie", "huissie" for "huisje", not *"huizie",
although plural "dagen" and "huizen" do have voiced consonants.
Same for Dutch LS.

These are just a few theories and observations from me.
Btw, I noticed that the Meckelnborgsch examples you gave didn't have
diminutive umlaut (i-mutation) in most cases, is that right?
The same is true for Drenthe, Stellingwarven and Groningen Low Saxon,
together with the Northern part of Overijssel. And for Western Dutch,
of course (i.e. in Holland, Zeeland, Flanders).

Ingmar

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net>
Subject: Language varieties

I wrote about Mecklenburg Low Saxon features:

> over, across: NS över, œver ["ø:vV], LS öber ["ø:bV], M oeber, œber
> ["œ:bV]

Actually, this was wrong.  For some strange reason, M dialects and dialects
farther east unround the vweol here: _aeber_, _æber_ ["E:bV] ~ ["æbV],
farther east _aever_, _æver_, _aewer_, _æwer_  ["E:vV] ~ ["ævV].

In many dialects, this word is then distinct from:

but, however: NS aver(s) ["Q:vV(s)], LE over(s) ["o:bV(s)], M oeber, œber(s)
["œ:bV(s)]

So we are dealing with a reversal of rounded versus unraounded.

Yasuji referred to the dialect of the famous writer Fritz Reuter.  He was
born and raised in Stemhagen/Stavenhagen (District of Demmin), in the
transitional area between Mecklenburg and Western Pomerania.  His dialect is
similar to the Mecklenburg ones but has a few mor eastern features and fewer
of the features that Mecklenburg dialects share with those of the Lower Elbe
region (but it does have intervocalic [b] instead of [v]).  Again, mutual
intelligibility between these dialects and North Saxon ones is good to very
good.

Ingmar:

> Are you sure? We Dutch Low Saxon never pronounce the spelled -ven in those
> cases as [v=m], but as [b=m].
> It is hard to say [lE:v=m] instead of [lE:b=m], and IF the [v] were
> pronounced, it would be [lE:v=n], with [=n], not [=m].
> But I think I understand what you mean: in derived forms like <ik leev>
> it is [v] not *[b]; you probably mean that the Meckelnborger say <ik
> leeb>?

I *am* sure.  In Mecklenburg and at the Lower Elbe it is consistently [b],
also in words like _aber_ (= _aver_) 'but', _œber_ (= _œver_), _Kabel_ (=
_Kavel_) 'cable', _strebig_ ~ _strävig_ (= _strevig_) 'steadfast(ly)',
_langlebig_ ~ _langläbig_ (= _langlevig_ ~ _langlävig_) 'long-lived'.

This rule applies only between two (underlying) vowels.  Thus, these
dialects, too, have a fricative syllable-finally; e.g., _ik leev'_ ~ _ik
leef_* 'I live', but _dat is langlebig_ 'It's long-lived'.

* < _ik leve_; many of these dialects have lost superlength/drawl tone 
(_Sleeptoon_),
thus devoice all finals.

There's an interesting aside about this phenomenon.  Strictly speaking, this 
/-b-/ choice does not exist in the words _Mööw'_ ~ _Meiw'_ (_moyw'_ ~ 
_mayw'_ < _moywe_ ~ _maywe_) '(sea)gull' and _Lööw'_ (_loyw'_ < loywe_) 
'lion', since they have underlying /w/ rather than /v/.  (Dialects that have 
lost superlength will pronounce them with an [f] at the end, those that 
still have superlength pronounce it was [v] and give the vowels extra 
length.)  This means that *all* dialects, also the /-b-/ type, should 
pronounce the plural forms alike: _Möwen_ ~ _Meiwen_ and _Löwen_ 
respectively.  This is true in most cases, but some speakers of /-b-/ type 
dialects treat the consonant as /v/ instead of /w/ and thus say _Möben_ ~ 
_Meiben_ and _Löben_ (but singular _Mööf_ ~ _Meif_ and _Lööf_).  I suppose 
this is a case of overcompensation or reanalysis by analogy with a 
predominant sequence.

> Are you sure it is from Slavonicv? I think this -ing diminutive exist in
> Danish, too, like in <kærling> etc.

How can I be a hundred percent sure?  However, my assumption tallies with 
that of the people that have written about it.  It is interesting, though, 
that this feature starts pretty much where there used to be predominantly 
Slavonic populations.  As I said, from Hamburg to Schwerin it's just a good 
hour by car (though during the Cold War it felt like millions of miles away, 
and, unlike people in Germany, I still haven't quite gotten used to the idea 
that the Iron Curtain is gone, since we grew up assuming it would never 
happen).  And the _-ink_ ~ _-ing_ borderline lies somewhere in between, 
closer to Hamburg than to Schwerin, pretty much where before colonization 
Saxon and Slavonic settlements met and tentatively overlapped.

> Manneken pronounced "mannekng" leads to "mannegng" => "manneng"
> => "manning".

Did this latter shift actually happen, or is it just your hypothesis?

Anyway, Ingmar, it's nice to know that someone actually reads these overview 
feature descriptions with apparent interest.

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