LL-L "Language maintenance" 2007.03.18 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L - 18 March 2007 - Volume 02

=========================================================================

From: Jonny Meibohm <altkehdinger at freenet.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language maintenance" 2007.03.17 (01) [D/E/German]

Beste Reineke,

nu' hebbt wi twey dennen Tampen opp eyn' Innen foot! ("Now we got the rope
at the right end", meaning: 'marching separated, but striking together')

Du schreyvst (among other wise stuff):
> The last example represents one of those "appalling" cases of even basic,
"small" words being substituted by German loans, in this case
> schon for al 'already'.  Other examples found often these days are wer for
wokeen (~ 'keen) 'who', wie for wo (~ woans ~ wodennig) 'how', > oft
> for faken 'often', and niemand for nüms or keeneen 'nobody'.

And thats it! It has taken a lot of work to bring you to this point, eh ;-)!

Perhaps I should add that I didn't mean LS as a whole when I wrote:

> ...so this language in fact doesn't exist any longer- no matter what we
and others are writing and discussing about LS.
I really meant this special, minor-influenced part of it, spoken by people
who are no longer able to survive our circumstances, requirements of the
so-called 'modern' life.

BTW: These old fossils even were unable to correspond with people bounded in
a different LS-dialect. I remember my Luneburg-ancestors feeling 'overburded'
to understand our regiolect, and for myself it was hard at the
beginning (with some very amusing situations) to find out the specialties of
EFLS (East Frisian Low Saxon).

Allerbest and compliments

Jonny Meibohm

----------

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

Jonny,

Man in de tün! So, nu is us Old-Kedinger Sneywitjen by lütten schynts ook
waak!

Tara! Good morning, Sleeping Beauty!

So you think you're getting credit for having gotten me around to seeing the
light, do you? Well, I've got news for you: I've been "quetsching" about the
said stuff for years and years!  Where have you been?

I was trying to come to grips with whatever mysterious, complex attrocities
you've been alluding to.  Is that it, the bee that's been buzzing in your
bonnet all this time?  Well ...

Indeed, at times it makes the pressure in my bonnet rise to exploding point
too.  But, hey!  This stuff ain't new, Mary-Lou!  You find plenty of
examples in literature going back to the mid-19th century, even in Klaus
Groth's works.  And, yes, it's been skyrocketing since World War II, with a
new wave of it since using the language became trendy again.

I consider what's been happening to the once newly introduced polite second
person pronoun part and parcel of this.  In the 19th century it was Jy (Ji),
thus identical with the second person plural.  Then, under German influence,
Sey (Se) was introduced, based on the third person plural ... except ...
it's objective form ain't "right":

German:
they: nominative sie, dative ihnen, accusative sie
you (polite): nominative Sie, dative Ihnen, accusative Sie

It's consistent, as you can see.  But now ...

Common Low Saxon:
they: nominative sey, dative jem ~ jüm, accusative  jem ~ jüm
you (polite): nominative Sey, dative Sey, accusative Sey

What the ...?!

And don't get me started on the loss of genuine idiomatic expressions and
literal translations from German taking their places!

But, Jonny, almost everybody speaks and writes like this now.  Sure, I don't
like it, and I still cling to objective Jüm, but, hey, I'm not going to stop
the tide, try as I may.  Language changes, for various reasons, as I said
before.  So what if the reasons seem like "stupidity"?  It sure isn't the
first time in history that that happens.  Being a participant, you can try
to struggle, and maybe you are successful as a big-shot.  But whatever the
outcome, it's going to be what it's going to be.  The other extreme is
prescriptivism, which is fine if you have an adequate following as a speaker
and writer.  As a linguist or observer, and as someone that shuns
dictionaries and thinks this isn't or ought not be a written language, you
are in no position to be prescriptivist in your approach.

It seems to me you want to have your cake and eat it too.  If you dismiss
book learning in this context, don't come to me complaining about the sad
state of affairs!  Don't keep beating up them "kids" that are genuinely
interested in learning and using the language but make what to you seem like
mistakes if at the same time you poo-poo dictionaries and textbooks!
Instead, look on the bright side, rejoice in their interest, and help them!

So there, Old-Kedinger Sneywitjen! Now you may go and wash your face.

Kumpelmenten!
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070318/23f523d6/attachment.htm>