LL-L "Language contacts" 2002.01.27 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 27.JAN.2002 (03) * 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: Stan Levinson <stlev99 at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Language contacts" 2002.01.25 (03) [E]

Regarding Roger's comment below, these are quite
standard Yiddish forms, alternating with "a gutn" and
"gut...".
Stan

> I'm sorry, the article was not wrong at all, it were
> just typing errors
> of mine.
>
> Quoting correctly, and checked twice:
> "A gitn", "Git sjabbes".

----------

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

Roger,

Like Stan (above), I too have heard and read both _a gutn shabes_ and
_gut shabes_ as usual Yiddish greetings (with the Hebrew equivalent
_shabath shalom_ "peace (for) Sabbath").  I have always perceived the _a
gutn shabes_ as somewhat more "formal" than _gut shabes_ (perhaps
because it retains more of the assumedly original _ikh vinsh aykh a gutn
shabes_ "I with you a good Sabbath") or _a gutn shabes zolt ir hobn_
("May you have a good Sabbath"), but I may be mistaken there.

By the way, do not let the alternation between _u_ and _i_ (_gut_ ~
_git_) confuse you.  It depends on the dialect; for instance in
Lithuanian (Litvak) Yiddish it is _gut_ [gut], and in Polish Yiddish it
is _git_ [git] 'good', 'well'.  Apparently, in the latter type of
dialect, /u/ first became fronted to /ü/ (probably still in Germany) and
then came to be unrounded (probably in Slavic-speaking environments).
The exemplary beauty of the Yiddish writing system based on Hebrew
letters is that it is so abstract that the spelling is the same,
irrespective of the dialect.  When you romanize Yiddish, you are forced
to decide on the dialect.  This was one of the main reasons for the
failure of a movement to use only Roman letters for Yiddish in the early
20th century, or even a little earlier.

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