LL-L "Language politics" 2007.11.25 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  25 November 2007 - Volume 01
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.11.24 (06) [E]

Heiko wrote:
>I disagree. The name Lütjensee has been fixed a long time ago. Please keep
in
>mind that the Low Saxon language has changed over time. If the current
usage
>of the local people in Low Saxon has changed to Lüttensee, this should be
>reflected in the new Low Saxon road signs.

Why would Lower Saxon road signs be needed in the first place? The natives
know what to call their village all right - isn't that enough? This is also
true for other areas of Germany - natives of Fulda call the town "Fol",
natives of München (Munich) call it "Menga"; Köln (Cologne) is "Kölle",
Kaiserslautern is "Lautere" - no matter what the signs say. Any non-native
who is interested in speaking the local dialect or language will learn that,
too. Why should it be of any interest to others?

This is Germany, not Wales, where the two languages used are truly separate
and names for the same place can be very differnt. Between High German and
Low Saxon, it is usually just a matter of pronunciation, I don't know a
single case where two completely different names are used. And changing one
letter, as in "Lütjensee/Lüttensee" is plain stupid and will earn the
concept of Lower Saxon as a separate language less respect, not more.

Where I live, this would mean changing the ending -hausen to -husen in many
names and then putting up both on a sign, which I consider utterly pointless
(and so do all the older, Platt-speaking people around here that I asked
about it).

Gabriele Kahn
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071125/48c9cea2/attachment.htm>