LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 31.OCT.1999 (01) [E]
Lowlands-L Administrator
sassisch at yahoo.com
Mon Nov 1 02:22:54 UTC 1999
=========================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 31.OCT.1999 (01) * ISSN 1089-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn//lowlands/>
User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
=========================================================================
A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
=========================================================================
You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
as message text from the same account to
<listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
=========================================================================
From: Sandy Fleming [sandy at fleimin.demon.co.uk]
Subject: "Multilingualism"
> From: John M. Tait [jmtait at altavista.net]
> Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 27.OCT.1999 (04) [E]
>
> I've heard Navaho quoted as an immensely difficult language to learn, and
> compared unfavourable with Lakota/Dakota, which is thought to be much
> easier. Both are presumably equally removed from Indo European - so do the
> peculiar difficulties of Navaho (tones; phonemic vowel - and consonant? -
> length; word classes) make it objectively more difficult, or is it just a
> matter of comparison?
This whole subject reminds me of when I gained proficiency in Czech (because
I had to) and then decided to extend my knowledge of Slavonic languages by
learning Russian (because it's a major language).
The immediate stumbling block I found on starting Russian wasn't the
Cyrillic alphabet, it was the fact that stress in Russian is irregular,
while I was more used to the regular stress in Czech. The languages are
pretty similar, but a simple difference like this can be offputting when:
1. you are more used to a language which is much more regular in some aspect
than the language you're learning;
2. you don't really _have_ to learn the language.
The first point may give rise to tales of the incredible difficulty of
learning a language, but the second point is probably the only one that
really matters.
I think the fact that Czech and Russian are so close is part of the problem
though - when faced with irregular Russian stress patterns after learning
Czech, I could practically hear my subconscious mind shouting, "This is a
stupid hassle and a waste of time! Why don't we just do it the sensible
Czech way?!"
I've learned my lesson and now on the whole don't bother to learn a language
until I've examined my motives and decided that I really have a good reason
for learning it.
I think this can be broken down further. There are different disciplines in
learning a language - reading, writing, speaking, listening - and people
tend to learn only those which they really need. Thus when English-speaking
Scots try to learn Scots they usually have some sort of
political/nationalistic agenda in which speaking Scots is unimportant but
they meed to look as if they can write it. Here a further subdivision of
linguistic disciplines comes into play - they don't _need_ Scots grammar to
give the _appearance_ of being able to write Scots, they just need the
vocabulary (though a bit of anti-English orthography helps too!) and as a
consequence they "nivver rax the geggie whaurlins thai kin crack or even
scrieve Scots whilk hamel bletherers cud thole" (ill-chosen Scots words
copyright Chambers' Concise English-Scots Dictionary :)
Sandy
http://scotstext.org
----------
From: john feather [johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk]
Subject: Multilingualism
Ian wrote in reply to Lila:
>>I think by definition we all speak our native tongues
perfectly - whether we adhere to the national standard is another matter.<<
I was drafting a reply which broadly endorsed this view (the linguist's
rather than the grammarian's) but I would say that it is true of grammar,
not semantics. Anyone can misunderstand and mis-use a word. I would also add
the qualification that the speaker needs the opportunity to review and
correct his/her first utterance to ensure perfection. It is quite possible
to make mistakes such as having the verb agree with the wrong subject if one
creates an over-complex sentence structure.
Isn't it "Ich sehe den Herrn"?
John Feather johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk
----------
From: Colin Wilson [lcwilson at iee.org]
Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 30.OCT.1999 (06) [E]
At 18:36 30/10/99 -0700, John M. Tait wrote:
>However, I
>believe that a great deal depends on attitude. If you start by assuming
>that you have to learn, you will learn. The problems arise when you assume
>you already know it when you don't.
R. F. Hahn replied
>Yes, attitude is crucial. However, it is difficult to convince yourself that
>you don't know and need to learn from the beginning when you understand a lot
of
>the language already.
This is a very important point, which I have not seen stated so succinctly
and directly before now. I'll write something about this in the
introduction to my course, "Stertin Oot in Scots", which is already
basically complete except for minor changes such as this one.
Thanks to both!
Colin Wilson.
**********************************************************************
the graip wis tint, the besom wis duin
Colin Wilson the barra wadna row its lane
postin fae Glesca an sicna soss it nivver wis seen
lik the muckin o Geordie's byre
**********************************************************************
----------
From: Roger P. G. Thijs [roger.thijs at village.uunet.be]
Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 30.OCT.1999 (06) [E]
> From: John M. Tait [jmtait at altavista.net]
> Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 27.OCT.1999 (04) [E]
> This is a very accurate description of what happens when English-speaking
> Scots try to learn Scots (which in most cases means, learn to write it -
> few try to speak it.) It is an almost unsurmountable problem, largely
> because of the fact - which you point out - that hardly anyone would be
> prepared to plough through the exercises which would be necessary to gain
> proficiency when they understand practically everything already.
Can you reverse this? Is it possible for a "real" native Scots speaker from
the countryside, raised in an homogeneous Scots environment (hardly to
realise nowadays with an omnipresence of TV and radio), to become a speaker
of English at a level of a BBC TV newsreader? Or will he (virtually)
repeatedly be misled and continue to interject Scots idioms while speaking
English?
In Northern Belgium Flemish, Brabantish and Limburgish dialects still keep a
place in the social live of the parishes. As a result (Northern) Belgian
speakers easely include Belgian idioms or vocabulary while sppeaking Dutch,
without realizing at all, some of the vocabulary they are using is not
common Dutch. (Dutch people frequently call this contaminated language
"Flemish"). I think it is quite difficult for a Belgian to adjust his
language consistenly in a way so that Dutch people think he is from Den Haag
(unless the Belgian left for Den Haag as a kid an stayed there for several
years).
I have been reading a booklet this morning about the teaching of Dutch in
Northern France. (Het niet-universitair onderwijs Nederlands in de
grensgebieden, Nedersaksen, Noordrijn-Westfalen en Frans-Vlaanderen,
Voorzetten 36, Nederlandse Taalunie, 's-Gravenhage). A big frustration for
the students from France is, when they come into Flanders:
1. Flemish people immediately recognise their French accent (I guess it's
impossible for the French to get rid of their accent), and switch to French
2. When the French people insist for the Flemish people to speak Dutch, the
latter generally do, but eventually speak dialect among each other, so that
the Frenchmen only understand what is addressed directly to them.
What's is curiuous though, and unexplained to me, is the strong dialect
variety over a very small territory in Northern Belgium. A Limburgian and a
West Flemish dialect speaker will not understand each other at all.
Elements that might explain:
- the transition to Middle German in the East
- the language formation in the old Territories
(1. the County of Flanders, a fief of France untill the treaty of Madrid
around 1520,
2. the Duchy of Brabant (having had many emigrants to Holland in the 16th
century), and
3. the county of Loon (now: Belgian Limburg) that remained, together with
Liège, in the German empire)
- the influence of French, as well as: Picard dialects in the West,
Walloon dialects in the East?
- ...
Regards,
Roger
----------
From: Ian James Parsley [parsley at highbury.fsnet.co.uk]
Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 30.OCT.1999 (06) [E]
Ron,
You make a very important point there about courses into which you fit. It
applies to me also in relation with Iberian languages and Italian.
Last year I lived in Spain for four months and it became very much my third
language at the expense of German. However at home I have only British and
German TV, no Spanish, so it is very difficult to keep up my Spanish. As a
result, German has taken over again as my third language, and I find I
forget some very basic Spanish words (while the grammar never really goes
away).
Firstly, it would be difficult for me to attend any Spanish course at home
because I have the grammar and understand it quite well passively. The only
solution is to go to Spain, which I intend to do next year.
Secondly, it makes in very difficult to find a Portuguese or Italian course
that suits. Written Portuguese looks very similar to Spanish once you've
learnt a few regular differences (e.g. lh-j - travalho, melhor; r-l after
bilabials - branco-blanco, praia-playa), while spoken Italian seems simply a
more rhythmic version. However, the intricacies, particularly perhaps in
Portuguese, are rather more difficult to learn, particularly when you
already understand so much.
For the record, I find the easiest way to get round this is to buy a reading
course to work through at home; this is what I have done with Dutch (with
which my German interferes). These, when arranged into proper sections, are
invaluable.
Best regards,
-------------------------------
Ian James Parsley
http://www.gcty.com/parsleyij
"JOY - Jesus, Others, You"
==================================END======================================
* Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
* Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
* Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
* Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
<http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
* Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
type of format, in your submissions
=========================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list