LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.06 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  06 October 2007 - Volume 01
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: Heinrich Becker <heinrich.becker at gmx.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.05 (02) [E]

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.05 (01) [E]

Apart from the fact that there aren't enough "native" teachers, a standard
would have to be found for teaching (and for textbooks), and that would
violate and soon kill off what remains of regional dialects. I doubt that
hundreds of different local varieties would be taught, as they ought to be!
Please keep in mind that Lower Saxon is NOT Welsh, the situation we have
here is quite different indeed.

            Bravo Gabriele,

from my point of view a revival of Low German can be achieved with priority
in regions, where Low German still is a common language. Educating LG in
schools, I agree with Jonny, would probably cause more problems in that
labile system. We all know, what happened with "Russian" in former East
Germany, a hated subject.

Educational systems and ways e.g. on private basis have to be found to keep
the language. Some hundred years ago different languages in Europe e.g.
Finnish and the Baltic languages (there are more) have only survived,
because the users found a space to carry on their lingual and cultural
identity. This was the church. I am realistic enough to think that this only
could luck in current bible belt of the U.S. but not in secular Europe. What
I try to explain is, there must be a movement which can enthusiast people
for an idea like that.

I'm waiting for other ideas and even better for deeds.

Kumpelmenten

Heinrich Becker
----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.05 (03) [E]

 Beste Reinhard,
you wrote:

 > People in other countries can't demand budgetary and educational changes
of the federal and state governments in Germany, but they can > advocate
them and appeal for them, and they have every right to spar with the
naysayers of which Northern Germany has more than its fair > share. After
all, decisions made in Germany, where the largest portion of speakers lives,
impacts the future of the language as a whole.
Yes- and they've got the right to come back and spend their retirement in
Germany, and even if they have lost their whole fortune and their old-age
pension our social and health system will accept them and take care of their
bread and butter. But there is no affirmation that they'll find the same
conditions here as at the point in time when they had left for abroad.
Change happens...

> Cultural and linguistic heritage is not abandoned or forfeited with
emigration, no matter how some may wish it were when "apostates" dare > to
touch the status quo back home. Playing the "disowning" card may seem easy
and convenient, but the rules of the game have changed.
In a mail some months ago I wrote that at least some emigrants belong to the
real and welcomed enthusiasts in conserving 'good' old customs of their
homeland but that they could be very disappointed if they are faced to the
realities back there from where they left their former cultures. Yes-
former, because if they want to succeed, to survive in their new life they
have to adapt the good as well as the bad customs over there and largely to
leave their own.
But I don't deny that eyes from outside can be useful sometimes because they
have got a different perspective.

But they're absolutely helpless if they argue this way:
> By the way, have arts, sports, history, and local history and culture been
stricken from North German school curricula? If things are so dire, > why
not get rid of those as well if they're still around. Who needs to know
about the past anyway?
Ron, what's the matter with you? That's far beneath your level, even if it
were a joke. This time you lost your sense of proportion I fear.
I'd like to know: why? Just a 'black' Friday or do you feel wounded in your
narcism?
Or is it, and that could make me very contemplative, because you have got no
own children whose future you are responsible for? Based on the doctrine
of some actual governments: "I'm living now, and devil may care for the
future!"?

Never mind- let's take it as a vivid proof for the fact that you're far away
from just being a benevolent shepherd; from time to time your
fuses obviously blow and you have to eat lamb ;-)!

Regards

Jonny Meibohm

----------

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

Moin, Jonny!

Thanks for the response.

Yes, I may have sounded like coming on to strong there, and I may have been.
But that particular thing, directed at you, was actually meant to be tongue
in cheek. I was playing the devil's advocate and probably didn't do a very
good job at it. No matter how it gets twisted in the end, the overall points
I was trying to make were that perceived truth and reason are not one
person's prerogative to claim and call but are subjective ("Wat den een sien
'reason' is den annern sien 'treason') and that trying to invalidate
opposing opinions by means of exclusionary tactics and unsubstantiated
allegations ("alienate to invalidate") are generally not part of the rules
of the game.

In fact, I have no fundamental problem with the pragmatic stance you took,
Jonny, though I do take exception to your "You have no children"
invalidation card, especially since you don't know what investment in
children I do and do not have. What I was trying to remind you of with my
snide comment was that "necessary" is subjective also ("Wat den een sien
'frivolity' is den annern sien 'necessity'"). If you told people in the
relevant regions that Kurdish, Albanian, Hungarian or Sami were unimportant
as school subjects and that it's good enough to limit minority kids to
Turkish/Arabic/Farsi/Russian, Serbian/Macedonian/Greek/Italian,
Romanian/Slovak/Croatian and Norwegian/Swedish/Finnish respectively, I don't
think you would get a very good reception. If you gave them a choice between
sports, music or art versus their language in schools their choice would be
clear, and they would argue that kids could pursue sports, music or art in
their time outside school. However, schooling in Low Saxon, Frisian and
Sorbian (which have no protection outside) is seen as frivolous by many
Germans, not Danish, though, because Denmark is next door and is watching,
and Danish schools are very attractive to non-Danish parents also.

So, all in all, my intended appeal was to allow for a variety of opinions
with open minds and compassion rather than make authoritative pronouncements
about "truth" and "reason," and I was also trying to make the point that
"It's our internal affair; so butt out!" won't wash anymore these days.
Also, a point I was trying to make was that alienating expatriates and by
inference disowning them regarding the shared heritage is in my opinion as
unfair as it is irrelevant.

While I was playing the devil's advocate then and was merely ranting against
dismissive and exclusionistic stances, in actuality I am not too sure that
Low Saxon as a mandatory subject in school would be a terribly good idea --
in Germany. Parents' prevailing attitudes against it would probably make it
a self-defeating venture, would whip up even more negative feelings. Giving
such attitudes, it might be more advisable to offer it as a choice wherever
possible and otherwise create a positive, supportive and attractive
environment in which people of all ages can choose to learn and use the
language outside mandatory schooling.  At least for a start, this would be
likely to generate interest and goodwill, would also generate incentives for
publishers and the media to be more receptive.  Having signed the Languages
Charter, the relevant state governments should then do their bit to help
this get off the ground and keep it alive.

I home this made it clearer, Jonny.

Kumpelmenten,
Reinhard/Ron

P.S.: I have a feeling your snide comment about expatriates returning to
Germany isn't quite in sync with what I know about German laws. What you
wrote applies only to "repatriation" of people from the former Eastern Bloc
and those that had to leave Germany in justifiable fear of persecution by
the Nazis, for whom special clauses were written into the immigration laws.
Unless they are refugees from persecution, former German nationals and their
children living in other countries not only have to prove direct kinship
connections in Germany and continued use of German language and culture to
be allowed to remigrate to Germany, but they have to arrive with a
substantial amount of cash and prove continuous guaranteed income from
abroad that prevent them from becoming a burden to the state.

----------

From: Marcus Buck <list at marcusbuck.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.05 (02) [E]

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de
<mailto:globalmoose at t-online.de>>
>
> Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.05 (01) [E]
>
> Jonny wrote:
> > Low Saxon as a luxury good: yes. But Low Saxon in rivalry to vital
> necessities: no!
>
> Finally a voice of reason! Coincidentally, the voice of someone who
> actually lives in the area and has a realistic view of what is going on.
>
> Times are changing; our language and our people are not toys, however
> quaint they may be perceived from the outside. Any efforts to keep
> Lower Saxon alive must come from within, from the actual speakers,
> their families and neighbours. The very thought of foreigners
> travelling here to rally for what they perceive as "our" cause in Kiel
> or Hannover is absurd at best (thanks for offering, though, Mike and
> others, I know you meant well).
>
> And, as Jonny stated, realistically, there are more important battles
> to win and more important causes to promote. Lower Saxon is a matter
> of the heart, so-to-speak, and important in a different way - to some,
> not to all, no matter how much we wish it were so. And I see nothing
> wrong with including it in German lessons anyway. Most people do
> perceive it as a variation of their mother tongue, especially since
> there are different degrees of hybrids (Missingsch etc.) spoken all
> over Northern Germany. And, at least where I live, speaking Lower
> Saxon is considered a tradition, a gimmick, a lovable quirk, but most
> certainly not a political issue.
>
> Apart from the fact that there aren't enough "native" teachers, a
> standard would have to be found for teaching (and for textbooks), and
> that would violate and soon kill off what remains of regional
> dialects. I doubt that hundreds of different local varieties would be
> taught, as they ought to be! Please keep in mind that Lower Saxon is
> NOT Welsh, the situation we have here is quite different indeed.
>
> Gabriele Kahn
It is true, that many people, not only in the Lowlands, but all over the
world, share the view "Our language as a luxury good: yes. But our
language in rivalry to vital necessities: no!" Me is a person from
Northern Germany with day to day contact with Low Saxon speakers too,
and yes, most Low Saxon speakers would perhaps agree with Jonny. But you
have to ask 'why' too. Cause they don't like their language? Cause they
see no worth in their language? No, few people will say something like
that. They love their language and would be happy, if it will last.

The reason is more like, what I spoke about some time ago: ideologists
and pragmatics.

"Finally a voice of reason!" Not reason, he is pragmatic. Reason means,
doing that, what is right based on logical consideration of a subject.
But being pragmatic means doing, what appears to be doable. Even when
the logical best choice is another, but harder to achieve.

Many people just accept the things imposed on them, cause "We can't do
anything against it anyway!" They feel, they don't have the power and
they are no match for the mighty.  Fighting for the language means
fighting. Let's stay away from all trouble.

Gabriele, you are saying, teaching the language from books will give
need for a standard, which will kill the regional varieties. Yes, if the
teachers are no locals and pupils don't have knowledge of the language
from their homes, this maybe could happen. But at least for those
regions, where Low Saxon is spoken more widespread, I don't see this
danger that drastic. You just must give the pupils contact to real
speakers. Only speaking Low Saxon with the teacher of course will not
work. But if you for example make excursions to a farm in the near and
the farmer explains his work in Low Saxon, this will expose the pupils
to more native speakers.

You are saying, Low Saxon is not Welsh. I don't know the situation in
Wales that well, but let's take Ireland. According to the 2006 census
there are 85,076 people, who do speak Irish on a daily basis. Let's take
this number as a measure of native speakers. There are 1,656,790
regarding themselves as competent in Irish. So around 95 % of all Irish
speakers are no natives and only have school knowledge of the language.
I guess, there is little taught of regional varieties in school. So,
would you say they should stop teaching the language in school? At least
outside the Gaeltacht Irish is even less useful than Low Saxon in
Northern Germany.

The only difference is, that Irish is not related to English, but Low
Saxon is to High German. So, there is a feeling of being an own nation,
an own ethnicity. And the assumption, that an own ethnicity has to have
an own language and therefore the language has to stay.

But, before the awakening of nationalism in the 19th century, there was
no real national consciousness of the Irish. The situation was quite
similar to the situation in Northern Germany now. Irish was not a value
on its own. Only the emerging national consciousness made it a value on
its own. The real natives, the rural peasants, who spoke the language
natively, first had to get contact with this national consciousness,
before they started accepting it and claiming it too.

Is it a prerequisite for actions securing the maintenance of a language,
that the speakers have a strong language consciousness? Strong enough
making them demand those actions?

What about African languages? In Africa there is very weak language
consciousness to almost all languages. English and French in most
countries are the languages of knowledge, media, administration, of
power. There is a language shift towards those languages. The bright
ones are leaving their villages and they go to the cities. There they
will speak the colonial languages and not the languages of their home
villages. For now most African languages are not in heavy danger. But
when the economic situation will be better someday in the future, when
there will be prosperity in rural areas of Africa, when there will be
rural colleges and not only primary schools, then many rural people will
shift to the big languages too. What about them? They have an ethnicity
on their own, like Irish or Welsh, but likely no consciousness of their
own language being a value on its own. Is it okay, if those languages
all die, cause there is no strong will of the speakers to maintain their
language?

Of course, if all Earth one day will only speak English and no other
languages known except to historians and geek language reenactment
groups, those future English speakers will not be sad about that
situation. Cause for them, it is like it is. But for me, looking from a
time of view with 6000 languages existing, the picture of that future
monolingual earth is horrifying. That is a subjective point of view, of
course.

Let me ask you: will the problems around energy and climate be solved
quicker if we give up our languages? Will China's economic growth be
affected by the fact, whether we teach our children Low Saxon?
Low Saxon still (despite the fact, the number of speakers went down
about 75 % since its best times) has nearly the same number of speakers
like Danish. There are 5 million Danish, that's not a big number. If you
look at economy, it would be best, if the Danish would teach their
children English only. Get rid of that language! It's of no economical
benefit!

Jonny, your arguments:

"no money" The problem is not, that there is no money at all, but that
they won't want to spend it on Low Saxon. The Bundeswehr does spend 420
million Euro each year for ammunition. Where are they wasting that much
ammunition? The Bundeswehr is a defense-only army and Germany refused to
take part in any military mission ever since WW II, if that mission
would include fighting! Germany does spend 2 billion Euro for theatre
and opera. The theatres in Germany receive only 500 million Euro through
selling tickets. So "no money" is only true, when you already assume,
that Low Saxon is of no worth compared to all other things the Federal
Republic of Germany spends money on.
"no teachers" Well, the Bundraat för Nedderdüütsch had a meeting in
Swerin on 3 October and part of the news release about that meeting was
the notice, that about 50 % of all schools in Mecklenburg-Western
Pomerania have offers for Low Saxon (Arbeitsgemeinschaften etc.). So
they can't be that short of teachers. Of course, there are few teachers
who have attended trainings for to teach Low Saxon, cause there was no
subject like "Low Saxon" until now. But that does not mean, we can't
start teaching it to them.
"no space left" Of course, if you assume, that all existing subjects are
more important than Low Saxon and Low Saxon is too unimportant to
increase the number of hours, there is no place left. But imagine, what
could happen, if you don't take the unimportantness of Low Saxon for
granted!
"no pupils" Again the 50 % schools in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania
having offers for Low Saxon: who does attend those AGs? Perhaps, maybe,
possibly, there is still interest? When you refer to immigrants: that
however is an argument that applies to any bilingual situation. I guess,
instruction in both French and Dutch is obligatory in bilingual
Brussels? They should perhaps stop that, for the sake of immigrants and
the children of EU servants.

Finally a real voice of reason: Learn Esperanto! Esperanto will make
life that much easier for pupils having to learn grammar and orthography
of their language on future monolingual earth.

Marcus Buck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071006/b3b33add/attachment.htm>