LL-L "Pronomina" 2007.03.20 (01) [E/LS]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L - 20 March 2007 - Volume 01

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

From: Marcus Buck <list at marcusbuck.org>
Subject: LL-L "Pronomina" 2007.03.19 (01) [E]

From: Jonny Meibohm < altkehdinger at freenet.de
<mailto:altkehdinger at freenet.de>>
- Show quoted text -
> Subject: LL-L "Language maintenance" 2007.03.18 (02) [E]
>
> Beste Reineke,
>
> Du schreyvst:
>
> 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 S ie
>
> It's consistent, as you can see.  But now ...
>
> Common Low Saxon:
> they: nominative sey, dative jem ~ j üm, accusative  jem ~ j üm
> you (polite): nominative Sey, dative Sey, accusative Sey
>
> Yeah- another good example what can happen if a language is getting
> watered.
>
> But- this 'Sey' is already fading, perhaps as a result of English,
> Dutch and Scandinavian influence on Standard German. People less and
> less use the 'polite' *Sie* in private talk, which also could be
> caused by a decrease of social differences. This slightly seems
> to vary between Northern and Southern Germany as well as between urban
> and rural regions.
> In LS you even won't find  it any longer among young people beneath
> the age of let's say 40. If you don't want to use a simple 'Du'
> ('you') you will first take the old plural 'Jii' in LS and also 'Ihr'
> in Standard German. It's really very common in Northern Germany.
>
> BTW: in our region up until the sixties of the twentieth century there
> still was LS 'Hey' (E: 'he', G: 'Er') the normal kind of addressing a
> man of lower social rank: "Hett *Hey* de Ossen all fou'ert?" E: "Did
> *he*  already feed the cattle?" G: "Hat *er* das Vieh schon
> gefüttert?". The way back, from lower to higher rank, went: "Joo,
> *Buer*, hebb ick all! Kannst' Du doch woll sülbst seyhn, wat se satt
> sünd!" E: "Of course, boss, I have! Don't you see that they are
> satisfied?", G: "Ja, Bauer/Chef, habe ich schon! Siehst *Du* nicht,
> dass sie satt sind?".
> But this (first) form is strongly aspected disreputable and cannot be
> used today; too many of the older people still connect it with bad and
> poor times for the working class.
>
> Allerbest
>
> Johnny Meibohm
>
> ----------
>
> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com <mailto:sassisch at yahoo.com>>
> Subject: Pronomina
>
> Jonny:
>
> > But this (first) form is strongly aspected disreputable and cannot be
> used today;
> > too many of the older people still connect it with bad and poor times
> for the working class.
>
> And I would say, "Good riddance!"  Or would you think of this as a
> part of "watering down" as well?
>
> After all, this seems like a great example of language changing with
> the times and with social changes that come with them.
>
> Addressing a working man with "he" instead of "you" and having him
> address you with "they" instead of "you" seems rather out of place
> these days, and for good reason.  Wouldn't you say?
>
> All these things used to apply in German too, and I don't hear anyone
> bemoaning the loss.
>
> Kumpelmenten,
> Reinhard/Ron
>
Op'n Dörp gifft dat hier blot 'du'. Wenn ik hier to een 'Se' segg (un
dat is keen hoochdüütschen Neebörger), denn maak ik mi lächerlich. Ik
heff mi nielich mit een över dat Thema Anrede ünnerholen un de segg,
wenn he Platt snacken dee, denn bruuk he jümmer 'du', un wenn de anner
'n Perfesser is. Nu is mien Dörp en lütt Buurndörp ahn grote soziale
Staffelung, is eenfach to lütt för'n Oberschicht oder sowat. Vun'n
Schoolmeester mal afsehn weren dat to all Tieden jümmer eenfache Lüüd.
Un rieke Marschbuurn, de sik wat rutnehmen kunnen, geev dat ok nich ;-)
Wenn dat fröher mal en Staffelung twischen Buurn un Knechen geven hett,
denn is dat al lang lang vörbi. Hier bi uns is meist sozialistisch mit
dat Anreden, gifft gor keen Stannsünnerscheed ;-)

Un Jonny, wenn du vun de Aboriginals schriffst, de noch archaic
originality and the special natural syntax harrn, dat kummt dorvun, dat
disse Lüüd keen Verständnis harrn för Regelwut un sprachliche
Wohlgeformtheit. De hebbt ruug un struppig reedt, so as de Gedanken gaht
un sik keen Kopp maakt för Regelns oder dat wat grammatikaalsch
inkorrekt ween kann. De moderne Minsch hett so'n rationale Mentalität,
de in korrekt un inkorrekt indeelt, de en Ünnerscheed maakt twischen
hübsch un missgestaltet, de de Welt sorteert un kategoriseert. Dat weer
för den Homo Buur op't platte Land eenfach kene Saak, de 'n Sinn möök,
dor över natodinken. De Lüüd hüdigendaags versöcht so to snacken, dat't
allens dalschrieven kanns. De Aboriginal weer nich so kopplastig, em
weer't egal, wat de Wöör för'n Reeg harrn, wenn man de Sinn so eben in
Reeg weer, dat dat passeer, wat he verlangen weer. Oder so...

Marcus Buck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20070320/cc4dc1a4/attachment.htm>