LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.07 (02) [E]

Tue Feb 7 16:11:53 UTC 2006

======================================================================
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)
=======================================================================

07 February 2006 * Volume 02
=======================================================================

From: Kevin Caldwell <kevin.caldwell1963 at verizon.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.06 (09) [E]

>From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Language varieties
>
>"anal" (fancifully derived from Latin...
>_anus_ 'old woman'

No need to come up with your own fanciful derivation when English already 
has something derived from that word: anile.

Kevin Caldwell

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.06 (08) [E]

Sandy wrote:
>I would say that those outside the culture should certainly research and
>study all they want to. But in the end I think it should be up to those
>within the culture to say what, if anything, should be done within the
>culture as a result of this body of knowledge that everyone has built up.

Well, yes, but only if the information for this "research and study" is 
freely given. Those who decide not to share their language should be left 
alone.

What I meant by spying, Ingmar: of course I could obtain plenty of details 
on this topic (besides what I already know), being an "insider" and all. But 
it would be plain wrong to then turn around and publish it in any way, 
unless the dwindling community that speaks this form of Platt would want to 
see it published (even then, I would not be the person to do it - because 
this is not about me, I do not seek a reputation as a linguist).

Anyway - I love this discussion, if only to see our Ron drool in frustration 
at the idea of all the hidden treasures out there that he may never get to 
play with, hee hee...

But hasn't this been a topic of many great fantasy and adventure stories 
ever since Jules Verne - the hidden worlds and cultures that may never be 
spoken of? Wouldn't we all hate the thought that there is no possibility 
they really exist?

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.06 (04) [E]

Ron wrote:
>The only challenging remark I cannot help making is that it would seem
>logical to me to extend this to all areas of human culture and to include
>music, that your views should therefore also limit performance of folk and
>period music and song to the people to whom they supposedly belong, that 
>you
>would therefore have no business performing other folks' music, especially
>where these are lesser known.

A very different thing altogether. First of all, music is deliberately 
"published", that is its very nature. Also, it can be argued that music is 
always "valid" and "authentic", no matter who performs it, because it has an 
infinite number of possibilities. But music also has a commercial value 
these days, there are copyrights and whatnot, so this would be an entirely 
differnet discussion. But in a way, yes, when they issue  cheap and badly 
done versions of, let's say, "Irish Pub Songs" or "Scotland's Greatest Folk 
Hits" for tourists, that might be considered some sort of identity theft as 
well.

By the way, you seem to be mixing up natural scientists and linguists a lot. 
Those are two very different things. Scientists are interested in facts and 
givens, things that really are and always have been, the way they work, an 
understanding of the big picture. Linguists, musicians, historians etc. are, 
roughly speaking, into cultural, human-made things which are, all in all, 
vague results of fleeting tendencies and coincidences, dreamed up entirely 
by our minds. So I don't think a direct comparison can be made in most 
cases.

All languages are part of the public domain? So, if Ingmar had not decided 
to share his Middelsprake, or Tolkien his Elven tongue, what would you have 
done? Sue them? Make up Hawaiian names for them until they confess?

Interesting question, by the way - is Klingon in the public domain, or is 
there a copyright? Can people get in trouble for using it, altering it, 
creating dialects?

Gabriele Kahn

----------

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

Kevin:

> No need to come up with your own fanciful derivation when English already
> has something derived from that word: anile.

Agh!  I liked mine much better, fancifully puerile and all.  But "your" way 
there are two words to play with, for instance in describing some people's 
attitudes.

Gabriele:

> A very different thing altogether. First of all, music is deliberately 
> "published",
> that is its very nature. Also, it can be argued that music is always 
> "valid" and
> "authentic", no matter who performs it, because it has an infinite number 
> of
> possibilities. But music also has a commercial value these days, there are
> copyrights and whatnot, so this would be an entirely differnet discussion.
> But in a way, yes, when they issue  cheap and badly done versions of, 
> let's
> say, "Irish Pub Songs" or "Scotland's Greatest Folk Hits" for tourists, 
> that
> might be considered some sort of identity theft as well.

Obviously -- or perhaps less so than I assumed -- I was referring to folk 
music, music, songs by "anonymous," songs that were meant to be used within 
a community or even just household, lullabies specific to certain mothers 
and their babies, family-grown songs of faith sung on backporches in 
Appalachian hamlets, worksongs of smiths, millers, spinsters and plantation 
slaves, polyphonous songs groups of marriageable Sorbian girls make and 
perform in bowers built for the occasion by prospective suitors that listen 
and watch from hiding places, wedding songs some now unknown klezmer group 
made specifically for a certain wedding ... and the list goes on. 
Especially in the 19th century, and in the Americas especially in the 20th 
century, people went around collecting and publishing these, and folk music 
enthusiasts now collect and perform them as public domain material.

The same goes for folktales, for instance the Grimm Brothers' collection, or 
Wisser's collection of Low Saxon tales.  Most of those used to be handed 
down only within a given extended family or village.  Now they are 
everyone's property.

I still have problems with your notion of privacy regarding language.  I 
have the feeling that the notion of secrecy is not being held by many, if 
any members of your community beside yourself.  It would be different if you 
were talking, say, about a secret "jargon" (such as Rotwelsch) or a Roma 
variety.

> Anyway - I love this discussion, if only to see our Ron drool in 
> frustration at
> the idea of all the hidden treasures out there that he may never get to 
> play
> with, hee hee...

Not quite so, only another stab at testing your protective construct, 
besides vain hopes for the anniversary project (which will go on without 
it).  In fact, there are published works about the dialects of Solling, also 
collections of folktales.  So perhaps I'm not quite as desperate as you'd 
like me to be, knowing that you are not the keeper of the language.

Linguistics as a whole contains disciplines that deal with language 
processing on a basic, universal level, including also physical aspects.  As 
such it is widely considered bridging "hard" and "soft" sciences.  It 
touches and draws from "hard" sciences, social studies and the humanities 
(arts and letters).  Philology, just one discipline within it, situated at 
the humanities end of things, is by some considered obsolete or virtually 
irrelevant (other than supplying corporae) and happens to linger on in 
non-linguists' minds as being representative of linguistics.

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