LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.24 (08) [D/E/F/LS]

Sat Mar 25 01:10:08 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 08
=======================================================================

From: Jacqueline Bungenberg de Jong <Dutchmatters at comcast.net>
Subject: LL-L "Introduction" 2006.03.24 (03) [E]

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

Ingmar ik dacht van wel:
gluipen = loeren, gluiperig = huichelachtig, gluip = reet.
Jacqueline

----------

From: Henno Brandsma <hennobrandsma at hetnet.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.24 (06) [E/LS]

> 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?)

Yn it Frysk : mânsk

> _kinds_ = 'childish, senile' [note the paradox!!] (< kind +
> genitive s?)

bernsk (< bern = "kind")

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

twaddehâns

> _honds_ = 'cynical, boorish' (< hond + gen. s)

hûnsk

> 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.

(en ek as fierdere befêstiging fan Ron syn opmerkings)

> 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:

Henno

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.24 (01) [E]

I've never actually heard or read someone use 'gluipen' in Dutch
so I don't consider that to be a real living Modern Dutch word. Maybe it
is a loan from Netherlands Low Saxon 'gloepen' ["xlup=m] from Drenthe etc.?
Dutch 'gluiperd' = creep however is very common.
Btw: in most Low Saxon varieties in the Netherland, Dutch ui is not [u:]
but [y], so uut [yt], huus [hys], tuun or tune [tyn] ["tyn@]. NB in Dutch
based ortho uu = [y].

But that wasn't the point in fact, my message was about the Dutch suffix
-ig [@x] where German Low Saxon has -sch [S]

Ingmar

Reinhard wrotë:
Ingmar:
>
>> There is no equivalent of LS 'glupen'in Dutch
>
>Ah, but there is, albeit veiled by orthographic chaos and semantic shift!
>
>Remember:
>
>Dutch = Low Saxon
>ui        = uu (Dutch spelling <oe>)
>
>huis    = huus <hoes>
>uit       = uut <oet>
>tuin     = tuun <toen>
>
>So, _glupen_ (<gloepen>) should be _gluipen_ in Dutch.  _Et voil _:
>
>(aan)gluipen 'to look (at ...) in a suspicious, dissempling, false-faced
>way'

>From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
>Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.23 (06) [E]
>
>Yes, but not in the examples you gave, Dutch has -ig etc here:
>
>Dutch
>-venijn - venijnig  (not *venijns)
>-vijand - vijandig  (not *vijands)
>-aap    - apig or aapachtig (not *aaps)
>-vreten - vreterig  (not *vreets)
>
>There is no equivalent of LS 'glupen'in Dutch
>
>Ingmar

----------

From: Heiko Evermann <heiko.evermann at gmx.de>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2006.03.23 (05) [E/LS]

Moin Utz,
> Beste Jonny,
>
> kiek maal bi Wikipedia in: "Een Kater (oder Koter) is dat sülve as 'n
> Bolzen un de "Mann" van de Katten."
> http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kater
Dor frei ik mi ja bannig. Dat is dat eerste Mal, dat hier in LL-L wen unse
plattdüütsche Wikipedia as Referenz angifft.

Hartlichen Dank,

Heiko Evermann

----------

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

Heiko:

> Dor frei ik mi ja bannig. Dat is dat eerste Mal, dat hier in LL-L wen unse
> plattdüütsche Wikipedia as Referenz angifft.

Dat wardt wul lest, un Dyn afryten voer de saak wardt voer dankt, Heiko.

Henno (benoarden):

> (en ek as fierdere befêstiging fan Ron syn opmerkings)

Tankewol, beste Henno.  Befêstiging is bot aardich foar my, befêstiging van 
'e Fryske kant noch mear.

Frysk _-sk_ =/= _-s_ is ek in goed bewiis.

Freonlik en tenkber,
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.
======================================================================