LL-L "History" 2006.02.13 (09) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

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

   L O W L A N D S - L * 13 February 2006 * Volume 09
=======================================================================

From: Andrys Onsman <Andrys.Onsman at CeLTS.monash.edu.au>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.13 (06) [E]

Hi Roger,

Far too overpriced, that book. I've read it and I wouldn't pay that much
for it.

I'll pass on the stirring thing, I think. One of the problems with
Britain is that it is an increasingly dynamic bower-bird, grabbing the
language, culture and worldviews it likes, but returning to an
underlying strata of xenophobia whenever it feels threatened: much like
every other nation. It's very difficult to accept a new breast to beat
when people believe the old one holds their heart.  Immigration to the
sceptred isles has been continual for at least the last three thousand
years. Each wave has added something new whilst assuming the garb of the
locals, (here a new belt buckle, there a new style of shoe) and
centuries later cultural archaeologists have to conceptually contort
themselves to deconstruct it all.

Of course, all this polemical red herring indicates is that (as they say
here in Oz), "I'm buggered if I know, mate!"  It may be more practical
to start with Scotland or Wales and work inwards from there. What do the
people who were pushed to the fringes (if that's what happened) by the
invaders have to say about it?

And that area around the Elbe is a beautiful part of the world: very
green and fertile, not an area that takes kindly to family planning. You
could do a lot of breeding around there, I reckon. How long would it
take to fill the spaces?

Cheers
Andrys Onsman

----------

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

G'day again, Andrys!

What a treat: two messages from you in one day!

> Far too overpriced, that book. I've read it and I wouldn't pay that much
> for it.

Ha!  To use stereotypes, as a Friso-Australian you have a double 
predisposition to self-understatement.

Interesting remarks about Britain there, mate!  Come to think about it, what 
you say doesn't strike me all that different from immigration countries' 
attitudes today and in recent times.  ("We came here and built all this, so 
let's close our borders and keep the bloody wogs out now!")

One thing that has long been puzzling me -- undoubtedly due to insufficient 
knowledge of history -- is that Germanic-speaking kingdoms sprang up in 
Britain pretty much right from the start of the "invasion."  At that time, 
Saxons in the old country prided themselves for their version of democracy 
and absence of a monarch, and I believe the same applies to Angles and 
Frisians.  Saxon kingdoms seem to have sprung up in England before 
Continental Saxons came to be integrated into the Frankish-led empire.  The 
Continentals certainly didn't relish the thought of being part of 
Charlemagne's empire, and they had previously fought off the Roman empire. 
Even after the Frankish empire defeated the Saxons the latter conducted 
their own affairs as though they were free as always.

What happened in Britain?  Chiefs of united tribes claiming 
("super-chiefdom") kingship due to Celtic influence?  Is it that they came 
to be Christianized long before their left-behind cousins and with 
Christianity adopted royalist structures (hence a type of Romanization)?

I know these may seem like really naive questions, but I hope you historians 
will indulge me.

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