LL-L: "Standardization" LOWLANDS-L, 15.AUG.2000 (06) [E/S]

Tue Aug 15 22:16:08 UTC 2000

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 15.AUG.2000 (06) * ISSN 189-5582 * 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>
 Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
 =======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =======================================================================

From: Henry Pijffers [hpijffers at home.nl]
Subject: LL-L: "Standardization" LOWLANDS-L, 15.AUG.2000 (02) [E]

Ron hef schreven:
>
>> Maybe we've got some words mixed up here. We also have a word one
>> could write as "froy", as in "froy froo" (pretty early/aardig vroeg).
>
>I don't really think so.  I should have mentioned that non-umlauted _frou_
>'early' occurs in some dialects in Germany also, assumedly the farwestern
>ones.  What this _froy frou_ of yours is, I do not know.  Perhaps some kind of
>"joke" putting two dialect variants together?
>
No, it's not a joke! It's just something really normal.
The "froy" I probably should've written as "fraai", with the same /aa/
as in "schaap". So it becomes "fraai froo", with the "fraai" meaning
"pretty" ("vrij" in Dutch) and the "froo" still meaning "early".

>> Wat is the plural of "koo" in your dialect? I figure it
>> would either be "köö" or "koos". The former would be consistent,
>> but the latter sounds better in my ear.
>
>Here:
>
>cow: _kou_ (_Koh_ ~ _Kauh_) [ko.U] ~ [ka.U]
>cows: _koy_ (_Köh_ ~ _Keuh_) [k{oe}.Y] ~ [ko.I] ~ _kay_ (_Keih_) [ka.I] ~
>_koyg'_ (_Köög_ ~ _Köhg_) [k{oe}.YG] ~ [k{oe}.Yj]
>
Hmmmm, that doesn't exactly clear the matter for me, but I take it I
should go with an umlauted version of "koo", hence "köö" (using /öö/ for
lack of better representation).

Something started dawning on me. I never compared all those "oo" words
which I marked with (17) to Dutch, but it seems to me that where I use
that sound, the Dutch have their "oe": koo->koe, stool->stoel, dook->doek,
froo->vroeg, koke->koek, etc... Just a thought there, does that clarify
anything? Or does it only obfuscate the matter even more?

grooten,
Henry

----------

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

Henry:

> koo->koe, stool->stoel, dook->doek,
> froo->vroeg, koke->koek, etc...

They tend to have /ou/ where I come from (also _douk_ [do.Uk] 'cloth'), unless
they are umlauted and have /öü/, the fronted equivalent, instead (_doyker_
['d{oe}.YkA] ~ ['dO.IkA] 'cloths').

Regards,

Reinhard/Ron

----------

From: "Ian James Parsley" <parsleyij at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L: "Standardization" LOWLANDS-L, 14.AUG.2000 (06) [E/S]

Scots taakan friens,

It's gey importan mairkan tha differs amang aa wir baeleids, ay, bot
A'm thinkan we maks mair o thaim whiles nor we sud. Tha tither dey, at
DIALECT 2000 i Belfast, A wis bletheran awa wae Dauvit Horsbroch fae
Aiberdeen i tha Braid, an we haen nae fash liftan ilkither. A'm
thinkan the'r a kin 'Warld Scotch' at ye can taak fur tae be sicar
aabodie lifts ye aaricht.

Sonse,
--------------
Ian James Parsley

----------

From: "Sandy Fleming" <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L: "Standardization" LOWLANDS-L [S]

> From: Andy Eagle [Andy.Eagle at t-online.de]
> Subject: LL-L: "Standardization" LOWLANDS-L, [E/S]
>
> A jalouse exponin hou things shoudna be spelt is mair eith said nor
duin.

Weel, there can be a awfu number o spellin rules, richt eneuch
(tho maist explanations A'v seen for Scots gies mair than's nott).
Houever, the ar a important differ atween the uizual "write it
this wey" approach and the "dinna write it this wey" approach
A'm suggestin, espeecially whan it comes ti re-eddicatin adult
writers that aareddy haes some kin o ruch wey o gittin their
Scots doun on paper.

Ti explain it throu ma ain experience, whan A first startit
tryin ti write Scots as onything ither than ma ain dialeck,
what A haed ti haun wis the SLS guidelines for writers in
Scots. This wis brief an juist didna explain eneuch, an wis
plain wrang here an thare, forby. Syne A cam on Lowlands-L
an wis introduced ti thon document you an John Magnus an the
ither anes haed pitten up on the Wab. This wis better, but it
wis faur ower haurd ti follae - ye could lift the rules in the
document but tryin ti apply the hale lot consistent in practice
wis juist impossible (ye understaun A'm talkin aboot muckle
screives o novels an aathing A write in Scots, no juist the wee
tirliewirlies o writins ye see in Lallans magazine an that).

Syne on the actual airticles in Lowlands-L A startit learnin things
A could uize for a chynge - first John Magnus explainin how "guid"
but no "fit" - A could apply that richt awa an ma Scots writin wis
mair nationally accessible richt awa. Syne this, that an the ither.
This wey a body's written Scots tichtens an standardizes ower a
period o time, espeecially if guid instruction's on haun (ay,
thare's the rub!).

This is the advantage o a "corrective" approach like this - insteed
o a adult learner haein ti learn a hale system an apply it, he can
improve his written Scots hooly an fairly ae lesson at a time.

> Monie fowk aye still writes thair ain dialect/pronunciation in a
> 'pseudo-phonetic' mainer aften walin 'esoteric' spellins juist
> tae mak whit thay'v wrutten leuk sae faur remuived fae Inglis as thay
can.

Aweel, the'r nane sae deif as winna hear! The'r naething ye can dae
aboot sic fowk, tho, A wadna lat them staun in ma road.

> As A aften said afore, on ma wabsteid the bitties anent spellin an
> pronunciation gangs intae the maiter bi wey o the sindrie dialects.
> Sae gin ye veesit ma wabsteid (www.scots-online.org) juist sneck on
the

That's a gey guid thing, that - A'd seen thon map afore but A no
jalouzed the pynt o'd! That's something A think A'll can uize in
editin texts for ScotsteXt.

> Some o the ensaumples that A can think on whaur mair nor the ae
> spellin wad
>
> be aaricht is in wirds lik:
> bowk [baVk] (vomit) is some airts this diphthong /aV/ haes been
vocalised
> tae /o/ afore /k/ sae boak wad be aaricht anaa. Whit aboot fowk
(folk)
> shoud
> it be spelt folk or foak?

A didna think on that! In ma dialeck it's [fok] an [bok]. What
aboot "howp"? That's [hop] in ma dialeck.

"Fock" an "bock" haes guid precedents in the likes o Fergusson,
an gaes alang wi ma ain ideas on hou best ti spell a [k] at the
end o a word (that A think A liftit fae John, like amaist aathing!).
Kennin this kin o thing helps me ti convert the ScotsteXt texts til
a mair consistent orthography athoot strampin on the original writers'
ettles!

A think we'r in braid agreement here. Anither set o spellins A
think wad be better wi mair nor ae spellin is the likes o
"laif/loaf", "roar/rair" &c. Some, the likes o "fuit" for "fit"
is plain wrang an should be corrected aerly, ithers, the likes
o "mair" for "muir" isna wrang but is needlessly localised, an
sae needs correctin an aa, but ithers, the likes o fowk/fock an
loaf/laif is a expression o the writer's dialeck athoot onything
ti say that ane's better nor the ither, and juist needs ti be pyntit
oot sae's the writer can make a informed chyce (see me, writin "fowk"
aa thae years what A'd raithered a been writin "fock"!).

Sandy
http://scotstext.org
  Things in this subloonary warld bein far frae
perfeck, 'No that bad' is the maist that mortal
man can venture tae say while here ablo.
             - Catherine P. Slater, 'Marget Pow'

==================================END===================================
 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>.
 =======================================================================
 * 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
 =======================================================================