LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.08 (03) [E]
Lowlands-L
lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Mon May 8 19:19:04 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)
=======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 08 May 2006 * Volume 02
=======================================================================
From: Kevin Caldwell <kevin.caldwell1963 at verizon.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (10) [E]
> From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
> Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (09) [E]
>
> Another example: since German has the same word vor "every" and "each",
> they
> will often use "every" in English when it should be "each", because
> "every"
> is more common and springs to mind first.
But I've noticed that most Americans don't make much of a distinction
between "each" and "every" these days, or between "each" and "both". So
perhaps this is a case of a non-native speaker trying to enforce a
distinction that native speakers have stopped making.
>Or they will leave the German
>"chance" where it should be "opportunity" in English.
Similar to the above, at least in American English, "chance" is often
synonymous with "opportunity". "Have you had a chance to look at that report
yet?" "No, I'll look at it first chance I get."
Kevin Caldwell
---------
From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (01) [E]
From: Pat Reynolds
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties"
Dear All,
I've seen it reported in a couple of places (and can dig out the
references if anyone's interested), plus had it confirmed anecdotally,
that learners of Dutch are told that it is a 'difficult' language to
acquire as an additional language.
I don't know as it is much harder than others; I happen to be better at
German than Dutch, but that's purely because I've put in more effort. My
impression is that compared with German the grammar is easier, and I also
find the vocabulary more intuitive - but that may just be due to Afrikaans
exposure.
I think some English speakers find Dutch pronunciation difficult, especially
the "g" and "ch" sounds. Also, some languages like Italian, Spanish and to
an extent German have quite clear and precise vowel sounds. Dutch, like
Danish, French and English have what I call "slippery" vowels - hard to pin
down to a particular value.
I also suspect that the learning of Dutch, like the Scandinavian languages,
suffers from the English Factor: so many of them speak good English, even if
you make an effort, they tend to switch to English just to make life easier.
Paul Finlow-Bates
----------
From: Heather Rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (05) [E]
Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
Reinhard/Ron writes
At times I wonder if it isn't better in the long run to learn a language
that is totally alien, of which you know no relatives, because you have to
learn it truly from the bottom up, so to speak.<
This is in fact borne out by research - unless the script is alien in which
case difficulties can pile up even if the language has cognates ( Greek for
example)
If you can instantly see no connections at all, you have to rely on
everything you learn.
If on the other hand there appear to be many similarities, then learning
can be only half-hearted / half brained ?
Such as faux amis between French & English
As the meaning of 'famille' is clear, pupils make little effort to learn
it, so its pronunciation is often forgotten and after 5 years of learning
French, a pupil will still pronounce 'Fam -ee-lee"
Similarly if in the early stages of learning there are too many examples
given of sentences whose structures parallel each other in MT and 2L, then
the pupil can be lulled into a feeling of false security and develop a
notion that sentence structure remains the same only the lexical items
change.
Le chat est sur le tapis.
Die Katze ist auf dem Teppich ( OK 'sitzt'!)
The cat is on the mat.
For more on this see Hakon Ringbom: The role of the 1st language in Foreign
language Learning ( Multilingual Matters ISBN 0-905028-80-5 )
Heather
----------
From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (08) [E]
From: Kevin and Cheryl Caldwell
Interesting. As a native speaker of American English, I would say "he
threw
up his dinner." I've never heard "upchuck" used transitively, only
intransitively.
Kevin Caldwell
This one of those "transitised intransitives" isn't it. Everybody
"downloads" data, they never "load data down". I come across similar things
as a geologist: it's fairly standard now to say "the sandstone outcrops at
the base of the slope" though purists would argue that it "crops out".
Paul Finlow-Bates
----------
From: Jacqueline Bungenberg de Jong <Dutchmatters at comcast.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (05) [E]
Ron says:
<At times I wonder if it isn't better in the long run to learn a language
<that is totally alien, of which you know no relatives, because you have to
<learn it truly from the bottom up, so to speak.
Hi Ron, I would tend to agree with you, certainly with older people. With
children that is not necessary, you just send them to the local sandbox for
a week or two and that is it. Groetjes, Jacqueline
----------
From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language acquisition" 2006.05.07 (10) [E]
Ben wrote:
>Arthur, as an American, I love the phenomenon of the separable suffix out.
>I
>changed out the light bulbs. I took out the trash. The evidence bears you
>out. I love the huge amount of uses for out and up. I saw one of those
>funny
>emails about up that said that we can fall down but we can't fall up. We
>can
>screw something up but we can't screw it down.
Change out the light bulbs? Now this sounds like a big fat Germanism. Lots
of German immigrants in your neck of the woods, perhaps? I have also noticed
that some Americans will say "I've been waiting on you" instead of "waiting
for you", which also sounds German to me, and more like "I've been serving
you" (waiting on you hand and foot).
Of course we can screw things down. The foot of a garden umbrella, for
example, or that loose, creaking floorboard. And my husband falls up the
stairs all the time - quite spectacularly so. He blames the cat. :-)
Gabriele
----------
From: Arthur Jones <arthurobin2002 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language Acquisition" 2006.05.08 (11) [E]
Dear Lowlanders,
We now have our own Da Vinci Code, our own missives of obscure and hidden
meaning! We were discussing separable verbs in Germanic tongues, so now
Pass' auf! Listen up!
Here's the secret, split-verb Rune: Go back to LL-L "Language Acquisition"
of May 7, which is led off by Gabriele's spot-on observations, then followed
by Ron's mysterious contribution.
Ron, please reprint your contribution so all can see. Thank you.
Please note: If we read Ron's paragraphs with benefit of your handy
Freudian-English, English-Freudian Dictionary, it becomes one of the
naughtiest, most salacious and tittilating double entendres since Moliere.
All with, pardon the expression, split verbs and dangling prepositions.
Good work, Ron! But we sussed you out, mate! (Is "outsussen" a verb?)
Met freondelijke Groete,
Arthur
----------
From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language acquisition
What did I tell you? It's indeed a popular thread.
Heather:
> This is in fact borne out by research - unless the script is alien in
> which
> case difficulties can pile up even if the language has cognates ( Greek
> for
> example)
Thanks. I didn't know that there was actual research. I knew about a bunch
of anecdotal stuff, such as about students at German universities making
equal and sometimes better progress in Finnish and Hungarian than those
studying Germanic, Romance and Slavonic languages. At the time it made a
lot of sense to me, but, as far as I was concerned, the jury was still out
because I thought that those who chose to study Uralic languages over
Indo-European ones may have been favorably predisposed regarding ability and
confidence.
Similarly, I noticed that almost all students of Mandarin Chinese make
rather fast progress in speaking and understanding the language, at getting
to a conversational level, at least once they are over the initial phonetic
hurdles, even though there are no cognates with any languages they knew
previously. Someone tried to tell me that this is because the speaking part
seems so easy compared with the reading and writing parts. I'm inclined to
believe it is because Chinese grammar is really quite simple and there are
virtually no socially determined registers (of the type that can make the
learning of languages like Japanese, Balinese and Javanese such a
"torture").
Gabriele:
> Of course we can screw things down.
And up. ;-)
Arthur the Incorrigible:
> followed by Ron's mysterious contribution.
I beg your pardon?! "Mysterious"?! What's that a code word for? And right
after "spot-on" in connection with Gabriele? Did I wake up to a parallel
mirror-image universe this morning?
> Ron, please reprint your contribution so all can see. Thank you.
What? And lay my naughty subconscience bare for all to disect? Well, OK!
You'll find it dangling.
It isn't "get it on," is it?
I should be more careful, bearing in mind that our resident _detector odorus
salacitatis_ is out there.
Mysteriously yours,
Reinhard/Ron
P.S.: Ah! I read it again and now think I know what our Arthur has
uprooted, or rooted up ... on. But some of us are way too innocent to
stumble over it right away.
***
And here it is, the encore:
From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language acquisition
I can just see that this is going to be a popular one, one for sharing time.
And it's all our Arthur's fault.
Ben, buddy, don't get hung up on "out" and "up" when it comes to "split"
verbs (which, of course, English has too, though just a muted version).
There's also "on," my wife's favorite when she does her own take-off of
Missingsch-derived North-German-colored English as a part of our _lingua
domestica_. She likes adding an "on" to the very end ... on, sense or no
sense, especially if it competes with another preposition; e.g., "Put it in
the oven in ... on!", "OK, give it on!",* "You look like you're having a
thirst on." [* Not too nonsensical if you consider grammatical "Bring it
on!" and "to get it on"] Apparently she was inspired by hearing a lot
dangling prepositions during visits to Northern Germany, and _an_ must have
stuck out for her. In a particularly flamboyant mode she'll top this off
(and on) with the typically North German _nä?_ (like Standard German _nicht
(wahr)?_, French _n'est pas?_ and very much like Japanese ね? _ne?_ [nE]);
e.g., "You're having a head on ... nä?" (= "You're having a headache, aren't
you?"). And she does this Hamburg intonation thing with it ... on. She
certainly has that one down. And it can crack me up ... on ... and upcrack
as well.
Cheers!
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.
======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list