LL-L: "Plautdietsch" 07.JUL.2000 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 07.JUL.2000 (04) * 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: john feather [johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk]
Subject: Plautdietsch

I used to subscribe to the Economist and now skim through it whenever I
have
the chance. I was a little surprised by Criostoir's attacks on it. I can
understand that someone might disapprove of its general political stance
and
even think that it misjudges certain issues - especially issues which are
highly complex, such as those concerning minority populations. On the other

hand Cristoir's sweeping condemnation seemed to me unjustified.

I therefore searched the Economist on-line archive to see what it had said
on the issues of Plautdietsch and Welsh bilingualism. The archive goes back

only to January 1995. Within that time period I could find no articles
which
I could match to Criostoir's descriptions.

It may be that despite my care I used inappropriate search terms or that
there is an earlier article on the repatriation of ethnic Germans from the
former USSR which I was unable to find. But if at one time the Economist
did
have a patronising attitude to the language(s) of these people I found no
evidence that it still has today. Two rather similar articles about ethnic
Germans in Kazakhstan appeared in the issues dated 28 June 1997 and 15
April
2000. The first of these contains the observation that many of those
repatriated to Germany "speak little German". That is the limit of the
linguistic comment.

The Economist of 18 July 1998 contained an article on bilingualism in
Wales.
Its general tenor was that with political power behind it a linguistic
minority can disadvantage members of the majority. It says among other
things:

"But in practice, it is impossible to assert Welsh without disadvantaging
English-only speakers to some extent. For example, making Welsh necessary
or
preferred for housing allocation or government jobs, as some local
authorities now do, certainly works against English-only applicants.
Gwynedd
County Council requires that all internal communications be in Welsh only
and either prefers or requires Welsh-speakers in all jobs. The reasoning is

that almost three-quarters of Gwynedd residents speak Welsh, and some are
more comfortable in that language. But it is also true that 100% of Gwynedd

residents speak English. Even for jobs in which linguistic skills are
barely
relevant, such as for a dustman or an accountant, English-only applicants
are in effect shut out."

This is perhaps the source of Criostoir's memory that
>For example, an article discussing the bilingual situation in Wales
claimed
that seeing as though all Welsh speakers also spoke English, there was
little reason for Welsh to be a co-official language.< I can't find a
closer
match.

I think it is clear that the point was not about Welsh being a co-official
language but about its being demanded as a condition of employment even
where it was irrelevant to the function of the post. It was in fact being
made the first language by this county council. But again, it is possible
that Criostoir was referring to another article which I was unable to find.

John Feather johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

----------

From: Reuben Epp [repp at silk.net]
Subject: LL-L: "Plautdietsch" 07.JUL.2000 (01) [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
> Subject: Plautdietsch
>
> Georg,
>
> Much of what you wrote above seems to be based on the assumption that
> Plautdietsch enjoys high prestige in Mennonite society.  Perhaps my
earlier
> remark had escaped your attention.  So, please, let me reiterate that, as

> far as I have gleaned from my readings here and elsewhere, Plautdietsch
> does generally *not* enjoy high prestige in most communities that use it,

> and it certainly is not seen as some sort of sacred language, being used
> for liturgical purposes only in a minority of cases.  I am sure that
> Plautdietsch is *beloved* by many or most as a mode of expression in
home,
> family, community, etc., a "language of the heart," but in most cases
> "High" German has been considered a superior mode.  At least this is what

I
> have been told more than once.  If this is correct, we might conclude
that
> the status of Plautdietsch is not very different from  that of other Low
> Saxon (Low German) varieties, and the situation is practically identical
to
> that of many non-Mennonite dialects used in American communities in which

> both German and Low Saxon are minority languages.
>
> We might even go one step farther and compare the situation of
Plautdietsch
> in Mennonite communities to that of Yiddish and Ladino in Jewish
> communities, Askenazi and Sephardi respectively, where these are
considered
> the languages of home and congregation, while Hebrew has been the _lashon

> kodesh_ (pronounced _loshn koydesh_ by Askenazim), the "sacred tongue."
> Especially Yiddish traditionally had low prestige, and Yiddish writing
> essentially began as a way to reach in writing, in the everyday spoken
> _daytsh_ ('German') language, female community members, few of whom used
to
> learn more Hebrew than was necessary for their prayers and blessings.
> While "High" German apparently is not considered a sacred language among
> traditional Mennonites, it seems to enjoy the status of a mode for
"higher"
> purposes, including religious ones.  As far as I know, the rise of
secular
> literature in Yiddish, Ladino and Plautdietsch, and indeed in all Low
> Saxon, is a result of more recent movements one of whose aims it has been

> to allow people to write in their own, natural languages rather than in a

> "elevated" modes using "superior" studied languages.
>
> I would be interested to know if our Plautdietsch-speaking friends agree
> with this description.
>
> Regards,
>
> Reinhard/Ron

Dear Ron,

You have described well the status of  Plautdietsch as opposed
to that of High German among the vast majority of  Plautdietsch-
speaking Mennonites.

Cheers!

Reuben Epp

----------

From: Reuben Epp [repp at silk.net]
Subject: Plautdietsch

Dear Georg and Lowlanders,

To view one/my book on the Story of Low German
and Plautdietsch, may I refer you to:

http://www2.southwind.net/~psdirect

Cheers!

Reuben Epp
648 Thorneloe Road
Kelowna, BC, V1W 4P6
Tel: (250) 764-4110

----------

From: Jorge Potter [jorgepot at caribe.net]
Subject: LL-L: "Plautdietsch" 07.JUL.2000 (01) [E]

> Georg Deutsch said, with related comments by Criostoir, Ron and others:
>
> I understand the problematic situation of families of Plautdietsch
origin,
> where the younger generation speaks only Russia. Coming to Germany
> obviously
> the most likely scenario is that they only learn German and forget about
> their Low Saxon heritage.
> However, I do not really understand, how the low status is experienced if

> Plautdietsch is only used for religious service.
> If one has a religious involvement, which mostly is the case if church
> services are visited, than I would rather expect that Plautdietsch has a
> very
> high status, like maybe Coptic in Egypt.
> But obviously THIS high status does not mean that the language as used
> vernacular is not in danger.

Plautdietsch speaking Mennonites in the US and Canada traditionally
preached
in the vernacular, but read Luther's Hochdeutsch version in the scripture
reading of the service.

Amish traditionally also preached in their vernacular, Pennsylvania German,

but attempted to use Luther's Bible not only for scripture, but to
"improve"
linguistically their homilies.

Neither group considered Hochdeutsch sacred, but each considered their
vernaculars vulgar.

Jorge Potter

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