LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.24 (06) [E/LS]

Fri Mar 24 20:36:23 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)
=======================================================================

24 March 2006 * Volume 06
=======================================================================

From: Marcel Bas <marcelbas at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2006.03.24 (02) [E]

Hi, all!

The discussion on the -s-suffix brings me to this:

In Dutch there are several adjectives that suggest an original noun in the 
genitive case, according to many people:

_mans_ = 'as a man, strong' (< man + genitive s?)
_kinds_ = 'childish, senile' [note the paradox!!] (< kind + genitive s?)
_tweedehands_ = 'second hand' (< tweede + hand + genitive s?)
_honds_ = 'cynical, boorish' (< hond + gen. s)

Etc.

If this _s_  is in fact a reduction of an older _sch_, is it then still 
reasonable to see it as a remnant of a case, or should one rather regard 
this as an adjectivation of a noun?

Guess not.

Regards, Marcel.

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

Hi again, Roger (Hondshoven)!

You wrote under "Etymology":

> Now it has become clear to me. I suspected a connection with 'vreten', but
> I
> was put off by that -sch. I now get the impression from what you write
> that
> it is pronounced like ch- in Dutch chocola. If that is correct I think it
> is
> a needlessly complicated spelling. Why not simply write 'vreetsj'?

Great question (even though it leads to "Orthography," a different thread)!
Depending on the dialect, <sch> stands for [S] (as in "shore," "sheep" and
"dish"), for [sG] (like <s> followed by Flemish-pronounced <g>), for [sx]
(as in Dutch <schoon>) and as [sk] (as in <scate> and <skit>).  So it's a
cross-dialectical symbol combination, and it has historical roots.  In Dutch
it corresponds to <sch> at the beginning of a syllable.  In precontemporary
Dutch it was <-sch> at the end of syllables as well (e.g., <nederduytsch>,
<hollandsch>, <vla(a)msch>, <engelsch>, <fransch>, <hispaansch>).  This
latter one has now become _-s_ (thus <Nederduits>, <Hollands>, <Vlams>,
<Frans>, <Spaans>).  Now, since Dutch does not have native /S/,
Netherlanders and Belgians want to write it as <sj> when they come across
the sound [S] in Continental Lowlandic language varieties, because that's
how their orthography has been handling "exotic" /S/ (e.g., in Indonesian
languages).  And this has rubbed off on speakers of Low Saxon and Limburgish
in the Netherlands and Belgium and has been disrupting the old orthographic
continuum.  For instance, the reflexive verb meaning 'to befit' used to be
spelled <schicken> in all related varieties.  Now it is <schikken> in Dutch
and Netherlands LS, <skik> in Afrikaans, <schicken> in Germany LS, and
<sjikken> in Limburgish.  Cross-variety reading would be a lot easier if the
same symbol (combination) were used, such as <schik(ken)>, to be pronounced
according to native phonological rules.

Groeten,
Reinhard/Ron

----------

From: Stellingwerfs Eigen <info at stellingwerfs-eigen.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.24 (01) [E]

Ingmar wrote: There is no equivalent of LS 'glupen' in Dutch

Ingmar, how about _gluipen_ (onov.ww.) 1 vals of huichelachtig kijken (bron:
Van Dale)

Uut et Stellingwarfse Woordeboek:
angloepen = gluipend aankijken
begloepen = begluipen, bespieden, glurend kijken naar
gloepen = 1. kort kijkend bespieden 2. sluipend, stiekem gaan 3. net even te
voorschijn komen 4. floepen (van de wind)
ingloepen = l. spiedend, glurend naar binnen kijken 2. ongemerkt
binnenkomen, binnensluipen

Mit een vrundelike groet uut Stellingwarf
Piet Bult

----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.23 (05) [E/LS]

Hi, Roger,

Du schreevst:

> > You wrote in connection with 'geeuwhonger':>
> >
> "Door seggt wii in uns LS _hungerfreetsch_ (adj./adv.) tou."
>
>  What does 'freetsch" stand for?
It's derived from LS: 'freeten', G: 'fressen', E: 'to eat (as an animal 
does)". In G we (try to) make a difference between behaviour of men and 
animals, though sometimes (e.g. at Mc. Donald's) you can't find a real one 
;-)!

Greutens/Regards

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.23 (05) [E/LS]

Leyve Utz,

Du schreevst:
> -en; von den Kööm heff ik en bannigen Kater..."

Hebb ick ouk all mennigmool haart ;-)! Man- dat is nu endgüllig keyn 
nedderdüütschen Snack.
Obers- wees bedankt föör dennen 'Bolz(en)', obschounst- mii dücht, dat is 
eider 'Oberdeutsch' as 'Nedderdüütsch'. Kunn oppletzt wat mit G: 'Balz' tou 
kriig'n hebben(??). Wat uns beid' bekannt is, is jo dat Woord G: 'bolzen' 
(Missingsch??) föör Foutball-Speel'n. Ellers- schull dat nu' viellich' 
weller 'n Uutleinen van Ingelsch (E:) 'balls' wesen?

Allerbest' Greutens no HB

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.23 (03) [A/D/E/LS]

Beste Reynhard,

Du schreevst reg. DUDEN:
> Ja, daar büst Du wul heyl goud bekand un up 'n besünnere kundenlist.  Dat
> is
> daar elk maal eyn hoegen wen 'n breyv vun Dy an-kümt.  ;-)

Na- door kannst Dii woll tou verlooten ;-)!
Uns Willem Busch hett seggt: "Ist der Ruf erst ruiniert, lebt man nachher 
ganz ungeniert!"

Man- Du scheneerst Dii jo woll jümmers noch, wenn Du wat dwaars dinken 
deihst? Verloot Dii tou- dey hebbt Dii ouk all laang opp 'n Kieker ;-)!

Kumpelmenten

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

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

Marcel:

> _mans_ = 'as a man, strong' (< man + genitive s?)
> _kinds_ = 'childish, senile' [note the paradox!!] (< kind + genitive s?)
> _honds_ = 'cynical, boorish' (< hond + gen. s)

Nope.  Not genitive.  I have no doubt in my mind that these correspond to 
the noun+sch > adj/adv category.  Note, e.g., German and English: _männisch_ 
'mannish', _weibish_ 'effeminate', 'womanish', _kindisch_ 'childish', 
_hündisch_ 'dog-like', 'canine', 'disgusting (in behavior)', _äffisch_ 
'apish', 'affectated'.

In English, this survives as a "pseudo-active" morpheme.  In certain social 
contexts, you can make up your own approximative derivations, and many of 
those end up being accepted and thus move into the official lexicon; e.g., 
accepted: "reddish," "grayish," "whitish," "brutish," "bookish," "boorish," 
marginal: "biggish," "oldish," "youngish," "sixish," "twelvish," "hunkish," 
...

> _tweedehands_ = 'second hand' (< tweede + hand + genitive s?)

This one I'd consider adverbial _-s_, as also German _abends_ 'in the 
evening', _morgens_ 'in the morning', _nachts_ 'at night', Low Saxon _'s 
avends_ 'in the evening', _'s morgens_ 'in the morning', _'s nachtens_ 'at 
night'.  Yes, it seems to come from genitive forms, hence older LS _des 
avends_, _des morgens_, _des nachts_.  Note also German forms like _eilens_ 
'hurriedly' (< _eilen_ 'to hurry'), LS _glyks_, _vourts_, _straks_ 'right 
away' and _dwars_ 'across'.  There's plenty of this in Dutch and Afrikaans, 
I believe.

See, in Dutch all this has been obscured by _-sch_ and _-s_ having become 
homophones and homographs.  You need to look at historical forms and or 
forms in related varieties to etymologize these.

Jonny:

> Man- Du scheneerst Dii jo woll jümmers noch, wenn Du wat dwaars
> dinken deihst?

Wourüm meynst Du dat?  Lett dat so?

> Verloot Dii tou- dey hebbt Dii ouk all laang opp 'n Kieker ;-)!

Dat sey ik as 'n goud teyken.  ;-)

Do, wat du wult! De luyd' snakt lykers.

Kumpelmenten,
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.
======================================================================