LL-L "Grammar" 2010.06.02 (03) [EN-NDS]

[Lowlands-L List]

=====================================================
*L O W L A N D S - L - 02 June 2010 - Volume 03*
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
=====================================================


From: victorie.a <victorie.a at home.nl>

Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2010.06.02 (01) [EN-NDS]



Moi Hanne, Luc.



Ik heb, ie hebt, hij, zij, et,dat, hef.

dat heb ik,

waor heb ie,

waor hebt zij



Wie hef? Now, hij hef!  Wat hef hij dan?  Hij hef kopzeerte….!



Drèens hebben wordt uut-espreuken as hebb’m



Groeten uut ’t Oogeveine.



Arend



----------



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

Subject: Grammar



Marcus wrote:



Both forms are legitimate Low Saxon, just as Ron said. But looking at the
map we can clearly see, that "wi hebbt" is used in the territories that were
historically settled by the Saxons and that "wi hebben" is an innovation
used in those areas that were once Slavic (Mecklenburg, Pomerania, Prussia,
Brandenburg), Baltic (Prussia), Frisian (Eastern Frisia, Groningen), Danish
(Schleswig) or Frankish (Northern Hesse) and only later saxonized. That's
quite astounding, cause virtually _all_ colonial dialects have this feature
in common, although virtually _none_ of the original Saxon dialects have it.

These plural forms are interesting in another respect. Saxon Low Saxon has
the scheme "wi hebbt, ji hebbt, se hebbt" for "we have, you have, they
have". All three forms are the same. Colonial Low Saxon has "wi hebben, ji
hebben, se hebben". Again all three forms are the same. That's in clear
contrast to the Frankish dialects (including standard Dutch and standard
German) which have the scheme "wir haben, ihr habt, sie haben" with two
different forms. (Although in Dutch this is obscured by the changes that
followed the introduction of polite forms 'jij' and 'jullie' replacing 'du'
and 'jij' [comparable to 'you' replacing 'thou' in English].) The isogloss
between dialects using only one form for the plural and dialects using two
forms is called the 'Einheitsplurallinie' and this isogloss almost perfectly
matches the language border between Dutch and German on the one side and Low
Saxon on the other side.



I wonder if present-tense plural *-en* in the colonial dialects is due to
influences of immigrants from the Dutch- and/or German-speaking areas to the
Baltic Sea coast (which began in earnest in the 12th century).

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

Seattle, USA



=========================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/group.php?gid=118916521473498<http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#%21/group.php?gid=118916521473498>
=========================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20100602/2c147d75/attachment.htm>