LL-L "Language varieties" (was "Grammar") 2002.04.04 (07) [E]

Thu Apr 4 22:55:02 UTC 2002

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 04.APR.2002 (07) * 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=Appalachian D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

From: "Randy Elzinga" <frisiancow at hotmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2002.04.02 (09) [E]

This morning I was listening to the new CBC Radio in Canada.  They were
reporting on some fellow from Ottawa who was "in hospital".  The
reporter
had what I assume to be a Canadian accent (and not the  "Canadian"
accent
that you find in foreign media by speakers trying to sound Canadian.
What're ye talkin' aboot, eh?).  That is, I wouldn't identify him as
being
from the USA, England, etc.  Yet, when I initially read the posting
quoted
below, "in hospital" sounded odd to my Canadian ears, and in any context
I
would likely say "in the hospital".  So it may be the case that in
Canadian
English both are grammatical.  What do other Canajuns think?

This reminds me of a previous posting, the important part of which is
also
quoted below, where Ron describes typical responses to "Thank you".
Particularly, Ron points out that there seem to be US English and non-US
English ways of responding.  Yet when I read that email, none of them
were
strange sounding or would warrant a raised eyebrow.

One might also point out the spelling of words like "colour", "honour",
etc.
with their British spellings, which have "color" and "honor" in US
English
spellings.  In the Oxford dictionary of Canadian English, it says that
both
the US and British spellings are acceptable in Canadian English,
depending
somewhat on geographical location, (and dependence on US English based
spellcheckers that haven't been adequately modified for differences
between
US and Canadian English).

Is it typical of Canadian English to include characteristics of both
standards that appear exclusively in one or the other?  Does anyone know
of
any other examples?

Randy Elzinga.
frisiancow at hotmail.com

(Note that I've used the term "US English" rather than "American
English",
since American English carries a certain ambiguity to some.  Does
American
English mean "English as spoken in English speaking parts of the
Americas",
or does it mean "English as spoken in United States of America"?)

<quote from Ron>

>While listening to the British Broadcasting Corporation's television
>news tonight, I was reminded to bring up a couple of grammar topics I
>have long wanted to raise.  Once again, they deal with grammaticality
>differences in American and non-American English (to paint with the
>coarsest brush available) but do not need to be limited to these two
>very large dialect groups.

<snip>

>(2)
>In American English, as in non-American English, it is grammatical to
>say "in school" and "to school," e.g., "She is in school" and "She goes
>to school," denoting "school" as an institution, as opposed to "She is
>in the school" and "She goes to the school" in references to "school" as
>a place.  Similarly, in non-American English, you say "in hospital" and
>"to hospital" in contrast to "in the hospital" and "to the hospital,"
>where, however, in American English only "in the hospital" and "to the
>hospital" are grammatical in reference to both the institution and the
>place, at least as far as I can tell.  Are there other cases like this?
>How do people perceive the differences semantically?
>
>Are there similar cases in Scots and other Lowlands languages?
>
>Of course, there are adverbial phrases like "at home" (vs "at the
>home"), Low Saxon _tohuus'_ (< _to Huse_ 'to house') 'at home',
>_nahuus'_ (_na Huse_ "to house") 'home(ward)', etc.
>
>Thanks for thinking about this.

<end quote>

<quote from Ron>
Having "grown up" with British and Australian English where responses to
"Thank you" such as "You're welcome" and "Don't mention it" are
ordinary, I
was at first a bit lost in American circles where responses like "Sure
(thing)" and "You bet" are normal and my "You're welcome" and "Don't
mention
it" met with fleetingly astonished looks (until the listener remembered
that
I "wasn't from around here"), probably sounding super-polite, formal and
old-fashioned.  "You bet" was very strange to me at first, especially
when a
few weeks after my arrival in the States I thanked a friendly,
middle-aged,
"down-to-earth" woman for a favor she had done me and she answered "You
bet
your sweet petootie, honey!"

<end quote>

==================================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 postings to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Postings 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
=======================================================================