LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.14 (02) [A/E]

Fri Nov 14 16:04:46 UTC 2008

===========================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 14 November 2008 - Volume 01
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please set the encoding mode to Unicode (UTF-8).
If viewing this in a web browser, please click on
the html toggle at the bottom of the archived page
and switch your browser's character encoding to Unicode.
===========================================

From: Luc Hellinckx <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics"

Beste Ron,

You wrote:

Is there any country in this world with language policies being enforced and
that yet manages to realize linguistic, cultural and ethnic homogeneity?
Would love to know. Thinking of moving already *s*.

I'm not quite understanding your question.

If you are asking if there are countries in which language policies (real
or *de facto*) have led to monolingualism, well most countries have been
working on it.

That's not what I was wondering about. I wanted to know if there are any
countries that are linguistically very diverse and that yet seem to manage
these different groups in a homogeneous way (read: no discrimination)
through an active language policy that is truly being enforced. Whether that
is practically feasible is what I would like to know. These fair governments
would have to treat each single language group, whether it be minority or
majority, the same way (both de jure and de facto), as part of a more
general attitude where cultural and ethnic differences as well would be
levelled out de jure.

Kind greetings,

Luc Hellinckx

----------

From: Mike Wintzer <k9mw at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.13 (02) [A/E]

Groetjes allemaal,

I find this discussion which crystallizes around "Dutch vs. Afrikaans"
getting ever more intresting as more and more subtleties come to light. No
longer living in the concerned areas (only in ZHolland have I spent long
periods) I permit myself only some questions and observations: I remember
that on Dutch TV some Flemish pieces were presented with subtitles, very
necessary, for me anyway. The same was done with Afrikaans which I found
helpful but not essential.

Luc, when you say Frankish, do you include the Lower Frankish languages such
as Dutch?

(Whatever your answer, you might want to kill me for having asked so
naively.)

Singapur, o, o: I had the priviledge of observing this in close-up. Since
decades the Chinese-dominated government is forcing (sic!) Chinese (not
Indians, not Malay speakers, not Europeans) to switch to Mandarin which in
my view amounts to genocide, as the immigrants from the North belong to very
divers ethnic, linguistic, cultural groups ("Chinese" is just a generic term
such as "European". It's the unifying force of the Chinese writing system
which creates misunderstendings).

Don't get me wrong: The Singapur government is not alone. To my mind, the
same sort of genocide is happening or has happened almost everywhere, last
not least in France and Germany.

Perhaps we have overlooked still one aspect in this controversy "überdachen
or not" (what would be a good English term for *überdachen*?). Isn't there a
difference between ABN taking the Flemish dialects, and Afrikaans, for that
matter, under its wings and German forcing LS (a much more distant language)
under its roof? To me the difference is essential as a language existing
under the almighty force of a central government has much smaller chances of
survival than if it it exists under a different government. So if I may
assume a Salomonic rôle. Ron's home is Lower Saxony which had to put up with
more or less centralistic Frankish-speaking governments for most of the time
during the last 12 centuries (since Verden AD 782). Luc's home is (I may be
mistaken?) Vaanderen, which largely escaped such fate to this day. So if Ron
shuns *Überdachung* and Luc advocates it I can feel for both of you.

Let me therefore conclude by quoting our guru (that's what he is after all,
isn't he):

My doel: Moenie die sprekers se gesindhede, bewustheid en vereenselwig
ignoreer nie!

That is LL spirit!

I'm all for national and international use of *linguae francae* as long as
pluralism, including linguistic pluralism, is allowed to continue and
thrive.

These are also Ron's words. Don't we all agree, at least in principle?

Tot lezens! Mike Wintzer

----------

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.13 (02) [A/E]

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

... Ja, Duits-sprekers kan veel (Pennsylvania-Duits) verstaan, maar nie baie
Pennsylfanish-sprekers kan Standaard-Duits perfekt verstaan....
Groete,
Reinhard/Ron

 That's an interesting turnaround on the usual relationship between a
"dialect" and the Standard form isn't it? For example, speakers of Geordie,
Glaswegian or other strong regional dialects have no problem with Standard
English, but someone who only speaks the latter often struggles with the
local varieties.

Regarding the mutual intellibility of Afrikaans and Dutch, I find it
interesting that Dutch speakers/readers appear to have little problem with
Afrikaans; my experience in South Africa was that the reverse generally
didn't hold true - but I sometimes wondered if that was a deliberate refusal
to understand on "nationalistic" grounds.  I recall having a technical paper
in Dutch which I found fairly easy to work through even with my less than
perfect Afrikaans (I never studied Dutch); yet South Africans, both English
and Afrikaans speaking, seemed to find it very difficult. After English and
German, I still find Dutch and Afrikaans the easiest posts to read on this
list.

It may be a mind-set thing: when I read or hear another language, especially
a Germanic one, I look for similarities ("ah, yes, that's obviously related
to English"...).  People with a regional language variety, especially one
under threat, tend to want to stress the differences - they don't want to
think their speech is like somebody else's, and understanding the other one
is almost an admission of defeat.

Paul Finlow-Bates

----------

From: Montgomery Michael <ullans at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.13 (01) [D/E]

Dear Ron

With the volume of mail that arrives on Lowlands-L and with my many other
commitments, I cannot keep up with postings so regularly as I once did.  But
I read the one below and was once again reminded how much I have learned
from this list that brings news and ideas from such a fascinating part of
our world and that I would have been deprived of otherwise.  So let me take
this moment and thank you again for your dedication to this list day in and
day out.  I cannot think of another one that has flowered so richly and
under the direction of a single individual.  You will no doubt defer the
gratitude to many others, but save a bit for yourself.  Long may it and you
flourish.

With kind regards

Michael Montgomery
Univ of South Carolina

----------

From: E Zinsser <ezinsser at icon.co.za>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.13 (01) [D/E]

Haai almal,

Dankie, Ron, jy verwoord presies wat die realiteit is. Afrikaans *is *'n
offisiële taal in Suid- Afrika en belangegroepe moet daaraan werk dat die
taal nie verwaarloos word nie, wat wel op baie vlakke gedoen word.

Die probleem ontstaan wanneer 'n regering nie die wil of vermoë het om hul
nasionale tale as skat te bewaar nie, soos wat op vele ander vlakke in Suid
Afrika gebeur ten opsigte van standbeelde, gedenkwaardighede en selfs 'n
straatnaam genoem na Paul Kruger.

Verwaarlosing van taal is simptomies van die verwaarlosing van Suid
Afrikaners se sosiale welstand op alle ander terreine; armoede en
kriminaliteit word eenvoudig nie aangespreek nie.

Nog 'n realiteit is dat Afrikaans se situasie heeltemal nie so beroerd
is soos dit met ander kleiner offisiële Suid Afrikaanse tale die geval is
nie.

Jy verwys na 'n paar tipies Afrikaanse woorde, Ron. Ek self het nog geen
Afrikaanssprekers gehoor die Engelse woord 'plonk' gebruik
nie (goedkoop/swak wyn). Ons noem dit gewoonweg maar 'dooswyn' wat ook wyn
in papersakke/kartonne kan wees.

Ek dink jy het *wegnemetjies (take-away food) verkeerd gelees. Die vorm is
"wegneem etes" of "wegneem kos".

Groete,
Elsie Zinsser

----------

From: E Zinsser <ezinsser at icon.co.za>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2008.11.13 (02) [A/E]

Haai julle,

Petrus, jou inligting is erg foutief. Die koloniale grondwet van 1910 het
Afrikaans nog glad nie as offisiële taal beskou nie. Dit het eers in 1925
gebeur.

Dalk kry jy die inligting van Engelse geskrifte; hulle het altyd graag (en
party is so agter die tyd, hulle doen dit vandag nog), na Afrikaans en
Afrikaners as 'Dutch' en 'Dutchmen' verwys.

In 1983 het die grondwet ook Afrikaans en Engels gelykmatig as offisiële
tale beskou.

Elsie Zinsser

----------

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

Thanks, everybody, for those wonderful responses. A special thank you goes
to Petrus for having kicked off a topic that requires us to examine various
aspects and facets of what is really a complex problem, and Michael for the
rare appearance that made the Kahuna smile.

"Guru", Mike?! Now you're getting carried away, mate. And – hey – I'm from
the Old Saxon region but not from Lower Saxony (though I did live in Lower
Saxony for a couple of years once). I have you know that I'm from the *Free
and Hanseatic City of Hamburg*, young man.

Paul, Pennsylvanian German (*Deitsch*) exists "under" English, has only
occasional brushes with Standard German, which may explain why it is
difficult for its speakers to understand Standard German. Apparently, the
same goes or used to go for certain Low Saxon dialects of the US Midwest.

Consider the beginning of Solomon DeLong's version of *The Night before
Christmas:
*
* Die Nacht 'fer Krishdawg:*

*Es war die nacht 'fer Krishdawg, wie darrichs gons hous
Nix hot sich ferrak'd, net a mohl en mous;
Die shtrimp war'n om shonshta in roi'a ufkenkt,
In der hoffnung der Belsnickle en yaders ba-shenkt.
Die kinner war'n all om shlofa im bett
Mit shpielsach un kandy war'n foll ihr kep;
Ich un die Mam, schlaferich, die arwet all ga'du,
Suchten unser bett fer notwendichie ruh. . . .*

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20081114/357937b6/attachment.htm>