LL-L: "Shared features" LOWLANDS-L, 31.MAY.2001 (04) [E]

Thu May 31 23:10:34 UTC 2001

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 31.MAY.2001 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.geocities.com/sassisch/rhahn/lowlands/rules.html>
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Server 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: Criostoir O Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L: "Shared features" LOWLANDS-L, 31.MAY.2001 (01) [E]

A chairde,

Thanks to Stefan, Ron et al. Your input is greatly
appreciated and as helpful and encouraging as always.
I think we've opened up an interesting strand here.

Ron wrote:

> In certain Eastern Low Saxon dialects, certainly in
> the now mostly
> extinct
> fareastern ones, there is unrounding as in Modern
> English (most likely
> due to
> West Slavic substrates);

This is intriguing. How far did Slavic languages push
into the Lowlands languages areas and what effects did
they have? I'm reminded immediately of Polabian,
Pomeranian and Slovincian - what phonological and
syntactical tangents did these Slavic tongues throw
up? And what consequence did Russian contact have on
the Lowlands diaspora within central Europe (e.g.,
Mennonit Plautdietsch in Russia, other variants of Low
Saxon in the former Yugoslavia and Romania)?

I notice from the Polabian pasternoster at
www.christusrex.org that Polabian had borrowed,
immediately on the first line, Germanic word order and
indeed the item "fader" (father; cf: Russian "oche",
Kashubian "wójce"): "nos fader" - compare Russian
"oche nash".

It appears that the true networks of contacts are even
greater than we might have realised, particularly if,
like me, one has not been paying attention for some
time.

Go raibh maith agaibh,

Críostóir.

----------

From: "Marco Evenhuis" <evenhuis at zeelandnet.nl>
Subject: LL-L: "Shared features" LOWLANDS-L, 31.MAY.2001 (01) [E]

Stefan Israel wrote:

> Old Dutch was quite similar to those languages, though distinct
> enough to be classified separately from the Ingveonic/North Sea
> Germanic/Anglo-Frisian-Low Saxon group.

I wonder what Stefan means with Old Dutch in this context, since most
coastal dialects in the Netherlands in those days were clearly part of the
'North Sea Germanic' group (Flemish -not to be divided in western and
eastern Flemish before the 1400s-, Zeelandic, most Hollandic dialects). Even
the written language used by the administration of the counts of Holland
used in the 12th and 13th century is very clearly an ingvaeonic language.
Other varieties spoken in the Netherlands in those days include Brabants,
Limburgs (both franconian) and the Low Saxon dialects spoken in the eastern
and northern Netherlands. All of which can hardly be considered 'Old
Dutch'...

> Fri _bregge_
> OldEng _brycg_
> Eng _bridge_
> Ger  _Brücke_ (often pronounced [brIk@]

Modern Zeeuws still has 'brigge' besides the more recent form 'brugge'.
'Brigdamme' is the name of a small village here on the isle of Walcheren.

regards,

Marco Evenhuis

------------

From: Georg.Deutsch at esa.int
Subject: LL-L: "Shared features" LOWLANDS-L, 31.MAY.2001 (01) [E]

Thank you, Stefan Israel, for your explanations about the "Thiudiscan"
mothertongue of Charlemagne!
regards
Georg

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Shared features

Dear Críostóir, Lowlanders,

Críostóir:

> How far did Slavic languages push
> into the Lowlands languages areas and what effects did
> they have? I'm reminded immediately of Polabian,
> Pomeranian and Slovincian - what phonological and
> syntactical tangents did these Slavic tongues throw
> up?

Scattered Germanic-speaking communities had existed in what are now Eastern
Germany and parts of Poland, but they came to be dominated by Slavic
communities.  Little is know about the language varieties of what is now
Germany, because no one bothered to record them before they became extinct, or
no such records survived.  Exceptions are fragmentary written records (mostly
vocabulary lists, religious texts and snippets of sayings, etc.) of
Draveno-Polabian of the greater Lunenburg (Lüneburg, "Hannoversches Wendland")
area (whose last speaker died around 1700, I believe).  Also, some believe,
probably with good reason, that Kashubian (considered a Polish dialect group
in Poland) is the surviving eastern branch of Pomoranian, whose western branch
(along today's German Baltic Sea coast) is extinct.  And, of course, there are
the two surviving Sorbian (Lusatian) standard languages (Lower Sorbian and
Upper Sorbian) and various non-standard dialects, which are well documented
and are unique to Germany but whose area used to extend to east of the
Nysa/Neiße River (in what is now Poland), with Zgorjelc/Zgorzelec/Görlitz as
the former Sorbian capital.  Thus, most Sorbian varieties were replaced by
Polish and German ones, in the northern part of Lower Lusatia
(B{l/}ota/Spreewald, just south of Berlin) probably first by Low Saxon ones.

Slavic language varieties are known to have been used in the Lowlands as far
west as in Holstein (including Lübeck), Hamburg (eastern outskirts),
Bardowick, Lüneburg, and Hanover.  Following Germanic annexation and
Christianization of the predominantly West-Slavic-speaking regions there was
massive Germanic eastward migration into them (under the motto "Na ostland wil
ik vâren," 10th-13th cent.).  Thereafter, a large area of what is now Germany
and also parts of what is now Poland became an overlap of Germanic and West
Slavic language and culture, with the Germanic varieties gradually taking over
and the Slavic ones gradually disappearing.  Sorbian lost massive ground,
including the Sorbian capital (which used to house the Sorbian Institute until
not too long ago, I believe), and managed to survive in spots only in Lusatia
({L/}u{z^}ica/Lausitz), namely where there was less desirable soil (swamps in
the "lower" north and a heath plateau in the "upper" south) and thus less
Germanic intrusion.  The Slavic people did not disappear but were gradually
absorbed, i.e., adopted Germanic language varieties and eventually
intermarried with descendants of Germanic immigrants and more or less lost
Slavic ethnic consciousness, so that most Eastern Germans are of both Germanic
and Slavic descent, and the linguistic and cultural varieties of those regions
have more or less noticeable Slavic substrates.  Many, if not most, place
names are Slavic.

The Low Saxon (Low German) and German dialects of those regions started off as
Germanic mixtures, based on various dialects that had been imported.  There
was also considerable immigration from what are now the Netherlands and
Belgium, so Dutch/Flemish, if now also Zeelandic and Limburgish, may well have
had some influence also.  (Apparently there was also Scottish immigrations to
certain areas of Western and/or Eastern Prussia.)  Added to the mixture are
Slavic elements.  Farther northeast, in Western and Eastern Prussia, there was
not only considerable Slavic influence but also Baltic influence, mostly Old
Prussian (which is now extinct).  (For example, as I recently explained on
Plautdietsch-L, _Kaddik_, the local word for 'juniper', is Baltic-derived,
probably from Old Prussian _kadegis_, cf. Lithuanian _kadagys_.)  Plautdietsch
is probably the lone survivor of this dialect group.

There are numerous Slavic-derived words in the Eastern Low Saxon dialects
(especially animal and plant names, tools, household items), and some of them
have made their way west; e.g., Low Saxon _Pietsch_ 'whip' (cf.  German
_Peitsche_ 'whip', Sorbian _bi{c^}-_ 'to beat'), and _Döns_ 'front room',
'living room' (< Polabian *_d(v)ornicë_).  Perhaps more important are
linguistic features, such as morphological ones (e.g., diminutive _-ing_ ~
_-ink_ < Sl. _-inka_?) and phonological ones (e.g., unrounding of front
rounded vowels (/ü/ > /i/, /ö/ > /e/), palatalization of /g/ and /k/).

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