LL-L: "Code switching" LOWLANDS-L, 10.JAN.2001 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

 ======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 10.JAN.2001 (03) * 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: Henry Pijffers [henry.pijffers at fluffyonline.cjb.net]
Subject: LL-L: "Code switching" LOWLANDS-L, 09.JAN.2001 (09) [E]

Ron schreev:
>
>Unfortunately, nowadays many people, especially "Southerners," think they are
>hearing "Platt" (Low Saxon/Low German) when they are really hearing
>Missingsch.
>
>I would not be surprised if there were a similar situation with regard to Low
>Saxon vs Dutch in the Netherlands and with regard to Scots vs Scottish English
>in Scotland.
>
That's the case indeed Ron, many non-speakers of LS think they hear
Saxon when in fact they hear Dutch based on Saxon or rather Dutch
pronounced as Saxon.

Henry

----------

From: Criostoir O Ciardha [paada_please at yahoo.co.uk]
Subject: LL-L: "Code switching" LOWLANDS-L, 09.JAN.2001 (09) [E]

A chairde,

In relation to the issue of code-switching, I found
much in my own experience of my variant of English
that concurs with Ron's observations as a Low Saxon
speaker. Is code-switching only considered such if it
is between two distinct and unintelligible languages?
I am doubtful of this. Where I grew up - in the Long
Eaton district close to Nottingham in England - our
variant was used to indicate familiarity, relaxation,
goodwill, humour, solidarity, and, most of all,
"belonging". Often was the situation where a group of
Long Eaton English speakers would encounter a standard
English speaker and instead of slipping into standard
English to accomodate the arrival, we would without
realising continue to exchange in Long Eaton English.
Looking back the purpose was not to be rude; but
rather to present, subconsciously, the notion that
this was a Long Eaton English-speaking area ("a
dialect area" to the ignorant) and that we would not
capitulate linguistically to presumptious encroachers.
Of course the main reason for this so far as I can see
it was social class, and a sort of vague local
patriotism of which I have discussed before.

However, we were known to code-switch between Long
Eaton English and heavily-accented standard English if
the situation coerced us. An example would be where we
were presenting ourselves to an outsider working as,
say, a local councillor or a headteacher, or some
other abstract of authority. Often we would talk at
them ("at" being the operative description) at which
the outsider would be perplexed; we would then repeat
ourselves carefully enunciating our alien
heavily-accented Long Eaton English and the
conversation would proceed onward in the standard from
there onward.

Nonetheless I think we were only too acutely aware of
the "coercion" we felt when we switched language. Is
this true code-switching if the speaker is aware that
she or he is doing it? Most times we would spit out
the standard in disgust, particularly if we had said
something in Long Eaton English to attempt to be
friendly or accomodating and we replied to with a
heartless "I don't understand..." In that sense we
felt very victimised that our goodwill had been
spurned, and that might be why we abhorred being
forced to communicate in standard English. To us,
standard English was not and is not a friendly, honest
language. It's the language of authoritarian rule,
persecution, coercion, dishonesty (there being an idea
that we as the working class were inherently
altruistic, whether rightly or wrongly), ignorance and
chauvinism.

So my question is this: what are the psychological and
sociological consequences of code-switching to the
minority language speaker? Does suborned
code-switching equal persecution and linguistic
harassment?

Go raibh maith agaibh,

Críostóir.

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