LL-L "Language survival" 2002.12.28 (05) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 28.DEC.2002 (05) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 http://www.lowlands-l.net  * admin at lowlands-l.net * Encoding: Unicode UTF-8
 Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm
 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
=======================================================================
 You have received this because you have 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>.
=======================================================================
 A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
 L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic
               V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Ole Stig Andersen <osa at olestig.dk>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.12.28 (02) [E]

> From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at fleemin.fsnet.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.12.27 (07) [E]

> 200 years ago many a Danish person would have begged to differ at the
> existence of a separate Norwegian language. Nowadays there is no
> question of it.

This is absolutely correct, but not quite to the point, I think.
It should have been double bad:

> 200 years ago many a NORWEGIAN person would have begged to differ at the
> existence of a separate Norwegian language. (Nowadays there are several.)

Right on!

Ole Stig Andersen
http://www.olestig.dk/english

----------

From: rossmay <rossmay at bellsouth.net>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.12.28 (02) [E]

Ladies and Gentlemen:

            I was highly gratified that my comments opened such a
preponderance of opinion.  I was soundly thrashed in a very gentle manner.
But, most of the replies had political overtones because I stirred a
long-smoldering fire in making this unconditional statement, that Scots is a
dialect of English.  It certainly does not have its roots in the Celtic
tongues even though some of the syntactic structure might have been affected
by a Brit or Scot's original Celtic usage.
            I am aware that Lowland Scots probably had a great influence on
the form of Late Middle English or Modern English, that worked it's way into
Scotland to replace the banned Gaelic (by whatever name, Goidelic, Cornish,
Erse, or what have you).  I would suppose that the many Welsh living in
Northumbria had an effect on it also.
            Now, at this point, I am speaking in an historical manner,
therefore political.  As I stated before, my ancestors (paternal and
maternal) originated in different parts of Scotland and Ireland (Ulster).
So, I have reason to be proud of the Scottish people, and their massive
contribution to the modern world, and I also realize that the Irish monks
were responsible for saving most of civilization during the Dark Ages, by
preserving and spreading Christianity, the arts and literacy  (another
thread).
            I am astounded that my statements about the warmth of Scots
would be taken as patronizing.  If that is so, Robert Burns, made a big
mistake by writing the way he did.  I am aware of the modern surge in
Scottish nationalism and am proud of Scotland.  I just hope their country
doesn't sacrifice independence and freedom for some failed political cause.
             I have one branch of my family on the paternal side who
descended from the Normans in England, but I always take the Celtic side.  I
am gratified by the history of the Scots, except for their waiting for more
than fifteen-hundred years to unite into one people.  The Celts of Europe
waited too long, and now speak a latin language because of it.  But that
again is another thread.  Please excuse me for digressing, but there are so
many influences on language that one cannot discuss language without
discussing history.

[Harlan Ross May]

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language varieties

Harlan Ross May wrote (above):

> I am aware that Lowland Scots probably had a great influence on
> the form of Late Middle English or Modern English, that worked it's way
into
> Scotland to replace the banned Gaelic (by whatever name, Goidelic,
Cornish,
> Erse, or what have you).

Exactly when, where, by whom and under what circumstances was Gaelic banned?

As far as I am informed, Goidelic is a Celtic language branch to which
Irish, Gaelic and Manx belong, and Cornish is a Brythonic Celtic language
used way down southwest in Cornwall.  The Celtic languages that used to be
spoken in various parts of Scotland were Pictish and Welsh.  Gaelic was
introduced to parts of Scotland from Ireland (hence "Erse" = "Irish") at
roughly the same time Germanic varieties were introduced to other parts of
Scots, and both these Irish-Scottish and Germanic (Northumbrian) Scottish
varieties came to replace the earlier languages of the region.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
* 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>.
=======================================================================