LL-L: "Language survival" LOWLANDS-L, 16.FEB.2001 (02) [D/E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
  L O W L A N D S - L * 16.FEB.2001 (02) * 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, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
  =======================================================================

From: Frank Verhoft [frank.verhoft at pandora.be]
Subject: Language survival

Geachte heer Vermeulen, beste Laaglanders

Dhr Thijs schreef op 15 februari
>Veeng ich eigelek ooch. Alpeteen ees het Limburgs as treektoal erkaant
>in Holland en in modulle vjariggemok veur sjoe-ele in Bels Limburg. Tés
>allein zow, as ich petoere ens Limburgs sjreef in déis lès, das ich nowt

>gein reakse krèèg en ich dan ok van mezére ejt anes mot keeize. Ich
höb
>toch gjan daze mich versteun.

Op 16 februari schreef Frans Vermeulen:
>Het laatste stukje van Roger Thijs in het Limburgs is zeer zeer leerzaam
en zelfs voor een
>Westvlaming heel goed begrijpbaar; bovendien geeft het inzicht hoe al de
Nederlandse
>(lees Oud-Vlaamse) dialecten uitgedeind zijn vanuit een oudere
gemeenschappelijke taal
>hoe goed men soms ook z'n best wil doen om uit te blinken in
verschillendheid.

Na ettelijke malen dit fragment gelezen te hebben, blijven er nog steeds
vragen in mij opkomen. Jammer genoeg is in mijn geval "geïnteresseerd"
niet synoniem met "getalenteerd", en smeekt de overjaarse student in mij om
wat meer uitleg bij bovenstaande regels, zowel aan de heer Vermeulen als
aan de andere Laaglanders.

Mijn vragen:
1. Op welke manier geeft het Limburgse fragment "inzicht hoe al de
Nederlandse (lees Oud-Vlaamse) dialecten zijn uitgedeind vanuit een oudere,
gemeenschappelijke taal?"
Het woord "uitdeinen" suggereert een kerngebied, waar situeerde zich dat?
En wat was er zoal te vinden in dat kerngebied?
Wat bedoelt u met "een oudere, gemeenschappelijke taal" die uitdeinde?
Indien u bedoelt Gemeengermaans, Westgermaans, of de Westgermaanse
varianten zoals gesproken door de Friezen, Franken en Saksen, drie stammen
(of stamverbanden, zo u wil) die hun politieke, militaire, economsiche en
taalkundige invloed deden gelden op de gebieden waar men nu Nederlands
spreekt, dan is deze vraag een beetje overbodig mijnentwege.
Of bedoelt u een soort Proto-Vlaams, Oer-Vlaams, Uhr-Vlaams?

2. Wat bedoelt u met Oud-Vlaams?
Aangezien ik deze term nog niet ben mogen tegenkomen in mijn studieboeken,
kan ik hem niet plaatsen. Kan u mij aub helpen deze term duiden, liefst
geografisch, linguistisch en in de tijd.
Is deze term inwisselbaar bijvoorbeeld met wat Van Loon "(westelijk)
Oudnederlands noemt" (in bijv. _Historische fonologie van het Nederlands_,
Leuven 1986, pagina 36), de variant die men *grosso modo* ten westen van de
Schelde sprak in de circa de 10de, 11de, 12de eeuw? Op deze pagina zet hij
het "(westelijk) Oudnederlands af tegenover de Oostnederlandse dialecten
(niet in absolute zin trouwens, maar enkel om het allofonisch karakter van
een taalkundig gegeven te illustreren dat andere "resultaten" genereerde
aan weerszijden van de Schelde).
Of verwijst Oud-Vlaams in louter geografische zin naar het (latere)
historische graafschap Vlaanderen, de drie huidige provincies (Oost, West
en Zeeuws) plus Frans-Vlaanderen, of naar het huidige, moderne Vlaanderen
tussen de Belgische kust en de Duitse grens?
En welke dialecten vallen onder wat u noemt "AL de Nederlandse (lees
Oud-Vlaamse) dialecten" (mijn nadruk).

3. Ook de zinsnede "hoe goed men soms ook z'n best wil doen om uit te
blinken in verschillendheid" stemt mij tot nadenken. Hoe bedoelt u dat?
Hebben taalkundigen als Berteloot, Gysseling, Van Loey, Vangassen e.a. zich
dan al die jaren enkel maar bezig gehouden met aan te tonen hoe mensen zich
in de loop van de geschiedenis hebben uitgesloofd "om uit te blinken in
verschillendheid"? En bedoelt u met de verscheidenheid de verschillende
accenten, dialecten, varianten?

Iek 'ôp iel 'ard te meuge diele in a experties, en nateurlék oeëk in die
van d' ander Laoglanders.

Met vriendelijke groeten en alvast van harte bedankt!


Frank Verhoft

----------

From: Andy Eagle [Andy.Eagle at t-online.de]
Subject: Language death

Ian James Parsley wrote:

>Therefore the answer is a
>relatively simple one - bring the child up in its
>native tongue, and in the official national or
>regional language. That way the child has a good
>knowledge of its own identity and culture through its
>own language, while being at absolutely no
>disadvantage (perceived or otherwise) to fellow
>nationals - in fact in some cases it will be at an
>advantage since it will probably find learning further
>languages later in educational life easier.

The last point is one of the main reasons why many (non speaker) parents
are
interested in sending their bairns to Gaelic medium nursery schools. Gaelic

is of course percieved as a 'language'. Is the same possible for Scots.
Probably not at the moment because many people still percieve Scots to be
'bad English' or worse 'slang'.

Roger Thijs wrote:

>I think this only contributes to survival if it is combined with strong
>nationalism.

Nationalism means different things to different people.
From, in my opinion legitimate desire for people living in a particular
'territory' to have control over their own destiny - this includes all
people living in the 'territory' an not just those with a particular
'ethnicity'.
To we are the 'master race' - no need to mention where that leads.

Colin Wilson wrote:

>For these reasons, although I'd be very pleased to be shown to be
>wrong, I have large doubts about the effectiveness of this kind of
>solution in preserving endangered languages, unless it is supported
>by other measures in the broader community. On its own, it will
>certainly produce people who can express *some* things in the
>endangered language: my question is, is that really enough? If
>people cannot express themselves fully in a particular language,
>naturally they will turn to another in which they can.

Quite right. If minority or lesser used languages are to survive they have
to be used (as far as possible) for all aspects of daily life. Otherwise
they juist become marginalised and eventually redundant.

>Television, on the other hand, has been much more damaging because
>it teaches people how to say a great many things in English that no
>school-teacher would ever have taught them.

Thus contributing to the marginalisation of the language and its eventual
redundancy.
In the case of Scotland, most Scots on TV usually presents Scots speakers
at
the worst as being 'socially inferior' or 'uneducated' and at best being
'old fashioned and uncool'. Hardly the stuff to boost self esteem among
Scots speakers. The amount of (any) Scots on TV can be measured in Hours
per
decade and not hours per week.

Thomas wrote:

>In Scotland I'll bet that schoolkids are still persecuted for daring to
>speak a Scots dialect in front of teachers. This was certainly the case in

>the 1940's and 50's when we were beaten with a strap, 'the tawse' if we
did
>not speak in 'standard English'. I am pleased to say it did not achieve
its
>goal, thank heaven. Once out of scholastic restrictions we all reverted to

>Scots I hope this is still the case.

Things have and are thankfully changing. The 'tawse' or 'lochgelly' has now

been outlawed thanks to European Union human rights legislation. More
schools are accepting the use of Scots by pupils. Some teachers now
actively
encourage it.

Ian wrote:

>Scots activists would probably
>think they would lose support if their cause was
>linked to Scottish Nationalism.

Indeed this is beginning to occur. Many in the labour party see
'campaigning
for recognition etc.' for the Scots language as nothing but rampant SNPism.

The Idea of linguistic rights is alien to them. Though many of the come
from
'socialist' backgrounds and argue for 'equality' this only goes as far as
our 'right' to be equally English.

>although I am a great fan of the Scots tongue and am
>keen to see it used regularly, I do not propose that
>it should *replace* English, or even that it should be
>used in all contexts. Business meetings of the future
>will take place in English, computers will use English

Once again if Scots is not used for all aspects of daily life it becomes
marginalised and eventually redundant.
Business meetings can take place in any language if all present speak it. I

of course accept English as the defacto lingua franca. I've 'talked' Scots
to Sandy about computer programming in a chatroom. I pretty sure we'd have
no problem doing the same face to face. Computer software may well be in
English because the economics behind producing Irish, Gaelic, Welsh or
Scots
versions is seen as prohibitive. Though even this could be used as a
marketing ploy. Do all the people who use Bank of Scotland (Banca na
h-alba)
Gaelic language cheques really speak Gaelic? This helps stop
marginalisation. Of course for the above, written Scots would probably need

a (more) standard form for it to be taken seriously.
Before the New year a well known supermarket chain produced an advertising
leaflet, and delivered it, I assume, to every household in Scotland,
selling
mostly alcohol and sindry product assumed to lessen the after effects of
the
afore mentioned product. The slogan at the top of the leaflet was 'Aw the
best'. the rest was of course in English. The same supermarket chain has
little signs allover the place claiming to be 'Proud to serve scotland'. I
myself find marketing ploys like that a bit silly and see through them. But

using the Scots language for advertising is great - and we as consumers
should demand more. The socialits may all want us to be equally 'English'
but capitalist gits like me say vote with your money!

>- even if you don't think that should be the case, the
>fact is it *will* be. Parents and governments will,
>quite rightly, look down on any attempts to revive or
>preserve minority languages which threaten their
>children's knowledge of English.

That's why it's important to show that bilingualism or for that matter
bidialectism is an asset not a threat.
As long as Scots has no perceived status it will be seen as a threat by
many
parents. No one should be forced to learn Scots if it ever became a serious

part of the curriculum.

Roger Thijs wrote:

>I have problems with these statistics, since I never can find any of
>these 40.000 speakers, even when hanging around several hours in the
>center of Belle-Bailleul on a market day,

The same is often heard in Scotland. People (Journalists) hostile to the
Scots language movement (if I can call it that) often claim never to have
encounerd Scots speakers. Of course not. It the situations they find
themselves in English is the expected language of communication. Get a job
with a building company (as a builder), go to a working class pub etc.
You'll hear Scots there.

Stefan Israel wrote:

>Many of my linguist colleagues trying to investigate these
>stigmatized varieties have run into social brick walls this way.
> They often have to get a speaker to introduce them gradually
>into the right social context.

This is also true for Scots. Even in my own family. My umwhile aunt only
spoke Scots to family and friends. If a stranger came into the house she
would, in mid sentence, switch to English. Though I did once experience the

humerous situation where my sister and her daughter came to visit. My
sister's daughter grew up in England and can only speak English. My aunt of

course didn't switch because she was family. The poor lass couldn't
understand a word.

Ron Wrote:

>In such a case, it is not impossible to revive a language on the basis of
>extant knowledge.  Until the early part of the 20th century, most people
>assumed that this was impossible.  However, the case of Hebrew has shown
that
>it *is* possible under certain conditions.

>There are now about 5 million speakers of it, and of these close to
>4.5 million are native speakers.

Are these native speakers monolingual? Do they speak another language and
if
so is it with native like fluency?
Is Hebrew L1 and another language L2? Or are they truly bilingual?

Andy Eagle

----------

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

> Andy, you asked with reference to Hebrew speakers:
>
> Are these native speakers monolingual? Do they speak another language and
if
> so is it with native like fluency?
> Is Hebrew L1 and another language L2? Or are they truly bilingual?

It is impossible to generalize in the case of a population as diverse as
that of Israel (even if we leave out the non-Jewish parts of it).

I dare say that nowadays a very high and growing percentage of the
Hebrew-speaking population uses Hebrew as first language, especially now
that two or three generations of native or at least near native speakers
have been raising their children to be native Hebrew speakers.  Especially
in urban communities there is much diversity.  People may or may not use
one or more languages other than Hebrew at home (and we are talking many,
many languages in toto).  However, there is much pressure to use Hebrew
outside the home.  Most native-born children end up with very high levels
of proficiency, and I think in most cases it would be hard to distinguish
L1 speakers from L2 speakers by adult age.  Especially kibbutzim ('kibbutz'
= a type of commune) produce predominantly native speakers, certainly those
that retain communal childcare.  In the latter, children are not raised by
their parents but live in specific children's quarters within a kibbutz,
having predominantly contacts with other Hebrew-speaking children and with
teachers, only seeingtheir family of birth on visits.

We have a few subscribers from Israel.  Maybe they can answer Andy's
question more competently.

Let me describe "my own" ("adoptive") Israeli kibbutz family as an
example.  Rachel and Menachem, the parents, immigrated from Poland (Lodz).
They are native Yiddish speakers and speak Polish with native proficiency.
Ilana, their oldest daughter, was born in Poland and began life as a native
Polish speaker, arriving in Israel as a 6-year-old.  In her adult years
(when I met her) her Polish was still fluent but somewhat deficient.  She
uses Hebrew as her dominant language and appears to be a native speaker to
outsiders.  Her personal notes and mumblings were all in Hebrew, as far as
I could determine.  The next child, Michael, was born in Poland, too, and
was spoken to in Polish when he was an infant.  He was less than a year old
when the family arrived in Israel.  At first his parents kept speaking
Polish to him, and he first picked up Arabic because they first lived in an
immigrants' area in which the majority came from Arabic-speaking regions of
the world, and there were also constant contacts with Arab-Israelis.  The
family moved into a kibbutz with communal childcare when Michael was about
3 years old.  He was immersed in Hebrew and in his late teens (when I met
him) spoke Hebrew the same way truly native speakers do.  I asked him about
it, and he said he considered Hebrew his only, his "native" language.  He
no longer spoke Polish or chose not to speak or listen to it (while Ilana
did), and he claimed not to understand Yiddish, though I saw signs to show
that he understood it at least somewhat.  Sara, the youngest, was born in
the kibbutz and was raised with a clear predominance of Hebrew, for by the
time she was an infant the entire family could speak Hebrew, and Sara only
came for visits from her Hebrew-only living and schooling environment.  She
told me she only understood snippets of Polish and Yiddish.  Occasionally
she would throw in Polish and Yiddish phrases in a teasing or joking manner
when she spoke with her parents in Hebrew, and she sometimes teased me with
Yiddish expressions because I spoke mostly Yiddish with her parents.  She
had a strong Hebrew "accent" when she did so, as strong an "accent" as in
English, which she had begun to learn in school.  Most definitely, Sara is
a native Hebrew speaker.  I am not sure how to classify Michael.  He said
he forgot all of his Arabic and Polish and considered himself a monolingual
Hebrew speaker, though he, too, learned English as a foreign language in
school.  The parents still tend to speak Polish in private talks with
Ilana.  They speak Hebrew to her when other people are around.  They speak
only Hebrew to the other two children, and these children help keep their
Hebrew up-to-date.  (All three children spoke only Hebrew with me, though
occasionally they tried out their English on me.)

I hope this will help shed some more light on the possibility of language
revival.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

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