LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 30.OCT.1999 (06) [E]

Sun Oct 31 01:36:04 UTC 1999

 =========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 30.OCT.1999 (06) * 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: John M. Tait [jmtait at altavista.net]
Subject: LL-L: "Multilingualism" LOWLANDS-L, 27.OCT.1999 (04) [E]

Ron wrote:

 While you approach a very
>"alien" language with a more open mind (not even hoping to encounter anything
>familiar and always being ready for "weirdness"), you tend to approach the
>closely related language with certain expectations and assumptions that are
>colored by your own language, and you will constantly fight the
inclination to
>translate literally from your own language and make up cognates (sometimes
>correctly but more often incorrectly), and literally translate idiomatic
>expressions.  In other words, interference from your native language is much
>more of an issue in this case.  This is definitely a problem among northern
>speakers of German trying to learn Low Saxon (Low Geman).  They tend to
>understand a fair bit of the language to start with, simply by way of
>exposure, and when they try to use it they tend to translate literally from
>German, also make up words on the basis of German, ending up with what is
>known as _Patentplatt_.  This is of course aided by ages of brainwashing
>people into believing that it's merely a German dialect.  I should imagine
>that there is a similar problem for English speakers studying Scots.  I have
>it with Dutch and Afrikaans, because I perceive them as being so very
close to
>Low Saxon.   I have made efforts to study them systematically.  Going through
>lessons seems like baby stuff and boring to me, because I understand
virtually
>everything.  So my self-discipline is not what it ought to be.  I want to
skip
>straight to the "good stuff," and then I discover that Low Saxon interferes,
>that if I literally translate certain expressions they come out either
>incorrect or meaning something quite different.

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. 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.

When I came to live in the North East of Scotland, I found the interference
problem between Shetlandic and North East Scots (which are obviously very
much closer than Scots and English) to be very acute. I overcame this
simply by speaking English and listening hard for a while before even
attempting to speak Scots. But that was in an immersion situation, where
practically everyone I knew or worked with spoke Scots all the time. This
is totally unlike the way in which most people who want to write Scots -
most of whom work in middle class jobs where nobody speaks Scots - have to
learn it.

Shetlandic and NE Scots are examples of dialects which are close, but not
close enough so that I could feel comfortable speaking Shetlandic in the
NE. On the other hand, I have no problem speaking Shetlandic to an
Orcadian, or NE Scots to someone from elsewhere on Mainland Scotland.

A couple of 'antrin' comments:

I remember that, in the days when theological students had to study Greek
and Hebrew (maybe in some places they still do?) many of those who were
least linguistically inclined found Hebrew less difficult than Greek.

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? Speakers of other Athabascan languages would
presumably find it reasonably familiar. Or would it be that it is easier to
learn to speak a sort of 'trade' Dakota, whereas Navaho is so forbidding
initially - for Europeans - that it's difficult even to get that far?

John M. Tait.

----------

From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Multilingualism

Dear John,

Thanks for your very interesting continuation of the discussion (above).  Here
are just a couple of comments from me.

Sorry I am not able to enlighten you further about the supposed different levels
of difficulty regarding Athabascan languages.  I have heard pretty much the same
story about it, and I am starting to wonder if this is not something that has
taken on a life of its own after someone made some type of casual remark about
it.  Even if it is not, there is also the possibility that the supposed
difficulties with Navaho in comparison with Lakota/Dakota are a matter of
*initial* stumbling blocks, such as a relatively more "alien" phonology or some
other type of "weird" structure.  I have heard similar stories about the
Salishean languages and other languages of our Pacific Northwest.  People will
tell you that for instance Lushoseets and related varieties of the Seattle area
and other parts of Western Washington are a lot harder than the Salishean
varieties east of the Cascade Mountains.  Apparently all it is is a rather more
complex phonology in the Western varieties, including sounds speakers of
European languages have a hard time imitating at first (e.g., among the
consonants an ejective and a labialized series, and devoiced vowels, even
ejective glottal stops!).  Again, this seems to be an *initial* shock situation
and the horror stories about it being fluffed up over time.

As for difficulties learning languages that are close to languages you know, let
me just add that, of course, this also applies where a new language is close to
any language you have learned before, not necessarily only your native
language.  I am sure many of our subscribers have experienced that themselves;
for instance trying to learn Dutch after having learned German.  I seem to have
the same English interference factor with Scots, even though English is not my
native language.  Similarly, I learned Portuguese and after that suddenly found
Spanish very easy to understand.  It seemed to me like "an easy version of
Portuguese."  I really would like to improve my active Spanish (which is very
important in this country), but there is no course into which I fit, and the
fact that I can follow Spanish very easily (watching it on TV and listening to
it on the radio all the time, not to mention hearing it spoken all around me
everyday) undermines my self-discipline in studying Spanish *systematically* so
I can *use* it and use *correctly*, not some sort of Portuguese pronounced in
Spanish.

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.

Best regards,

Reinhard/Ron

==================================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
 =========================================================================