LL-L "Orthography" 2002.01.30 (05) [S]

Thu Jan 31 00:07:43 UTC 2002

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 30.JAN.2002 (05) * 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: "John M. Tait" <jmtait at altavista.net>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2002.01.28 (04) [S]

Sandy wrate:

>Help ma boab! I thocht I'd pit up a site tae lairn fowk Scots
>grammar an aabody's lairnin _me_!

Na, na, man - juist pittin in ma tippence-ha'penny wirth!
>
>I shuppit thon vowel cairt bi daein it first for ma ain
>dialeck an syne gaun throu the SND tae phonetics tae see
>what adjustments haed tae be made tae mak it general, but
>it's leukin like I missed some important pynts - no that
>surprisin wi the wye the SND gies muckle lists o aa kin o
>subtle vowel variants fae the different dialecks.

Ay. The trauchle wi aa thon kynd o studies - the LAS is the same - is sinderin
the phonemes frae aa the phonetic whigmaleeries at thay gie ye. Than ye'v the
ither fankle o sinderin ae dialect's phonemes - an some haes mair nor ithers -
frae underlyin phonemes at wad dae for a diaphonemic approach ti orthography.

This is whaur Catford comes in haundy. He's areddy duin maist o the grundwark,
an
he gies baith a meenimun an a maximum inventory (8 or 12 vowels), tho for
diaphonemics the maximum wad need anither ane. E'en tho nae actual dialect
haes
this monie, the virtual hinnerleid dis, an that maun shuirly be the foond for
a
diaphonemic reddin up o spellin.

Coorse, if ye'r learnin fowk aboot Scots pronunciation it's anither maiter
aathegither, cause the /e+/ an /e-/ vowels is maistly no sindered frae /i/ an
/e/. /e/ is maistly merged wi /e-/ (tho whiles wi /e+/ an syne wi /i/) an /e+/
aither wi /i/ or /e/, sae ye coud verra weel say at [i] an [e] is the uisual
pronunciations o aa thae vowels, tho dialects differs in whit ane is sayed
whit wey.

It depends whit the ettle is. In a guide ti Scots pronunciation - say for
lairners o Scots - less vowels wad be nott nor for understaundin the differin
dialect pronunciations (the backgrund for reddin spellin ti inhaud thaim.)
Baith
is guid ettles, but I think it's important ti sinder thaim frae ither. I wad
say
at, for a pronunciation guide, ye wadna need /e+/ an /e-/, but I think ye wad
still need /O/, cause o the wey at pronunciations like 'stoap' an 'shoap'
soonds
'Glesca' ti oniebodie frae the North. (Fowk frae hereaboots whiles caa's aa
Central pronunciations 'Glesca'! In fact, I'v heared English-speakin fowk frae
the East caa'in braid Scots frae ither pairts o the East 'Glasgow', juist
cause
thay thocht is wis roch!)

>I'll hae tae print aa this oot that ye've explained an
>gang ower the SND again wi'd an see what I can lairn
>atween the twa.

Lat's ken whit ye finnd oot. I dinna aften hae a chance ti get a sklent at the
SND, as ye ken.
>
>Here twathree pynts the while, tho...
>
>> The vowel at I'v written /O/ - the COT vowel - merges wi /o/ in maist
>> Central dialects, an this laeds fowk frae thareaboot (e.g. Billy Kay in
>> his The Mither Tongue) ti regaird it as a English affectation. But
>> Johnston shaws at the'r a disteenction atween COT an COAT type words in
>> monie Scots dialects - "However, there are dialects on all four sides of
>> the Central Belt which still keep the distinction intact and have an A2
>> vowel." The disteenction micht be [o]/[o:] or somethin like that, but
>> for a phonemic transcription o Scots as a hale, /O/ dis as weel as
>> oniething.
>
>This is new tae me - I ken fine aboot dialecks wi /O/ but I
>didna ken this sindered the likes o "cot" an "coat" (in my
>dialeck "coat" is whiles sayed lang, but aften short - I dout
>this is a SVLR effeck - "cot" is aye sayed short, but the'r
>nae differ in the quality o the vowels).

Sae coud it be at, in your dialect, the vowel I'v caa'd /O/ is aye short, but
the
/o/ ane merges wi it whiles, whan an whaur bein steered bi the SVLR?

Anither complication I didna mention is at some dialects pits thegither /O/ an
/A/ whiles. Maist aa SSE speakers dis this. Sae my wife an bairns says
somethin
like [kQ;?] (dinna ken gin [;] is richt SAMPA for hauf-lang) for baith
_caught_
an _cot_, whaurbyes I say [kQt] (or mibbie [kOt]) an [kQ:t]. The vowel
poseetion
is aiblins juist a bittie different, but the main differ is the lenth.

This laeds ti some fankles in Scots spellin, for example, _dochter/dauchter_.
I
hae a disteenction in Shetlandic:

2. trauchle, lauch, faut, etc. [a:]
3. tocht, brocht, dochter, etc. [ou(C)]

(The lenth in e.g. _lauch_ micht be non-phonemic lenthenin afore vyceless
fricatives, charactereestic in Shetlandic, causin merger wi /a:/, as in
_faut_, afore [x].)

Sae _dochter_ groups wi _brocht_, _bocht_, etc. But in the LAS, for Tranent, I
see _dochter_ groups wi e.g. _lauch_ wi a unroondit [A] vowel, whaurbyes
_bocht_,
_wrocht_ etc. haes a roondit [Q] vowel; an sae it wad naiturally be spelt
<dauchter>.
>
>I howp ye're no lumpin me thegither wi aa thae ither "Central"
>bodies - I can see a stime or twa every noos an thans!

Naething wrang wi bein Central! I'm mair like eccentric!
>
 I dinna ken what I'm meant
>tae dae aboot this conspiracy tae stop me finndin beuks the
>likes o Catford's tho. I mean I'm never oot the saicont-haun
>beukshops whan I'm up in Scotland, I've fund hunders o beuks
>in Scots an no _ane_ haes a daecent lingwistic study like this.
>The only explanation is that fowk taks thae beuks aff the shelfs
>the meenit they see me comin!

Catford's study is a airticle caa'd 'Vowel Systems of Scots Dialects' in a
journal caa'd 'Transactions of the Philological Society' 1957. Yer only hope
is
ti finnd this in a University library an photocopy it. The same thing gaes for
Johnston's study: Paul Johnston, _Regional Variation_ in 'Edinburgh History of
the Scots Language.' (I'll see ye aboot sendin ye some mair wittins aboot
this.)
>
>> This is juist me thinkin wi my fingers (better nor my heid, I daursay!)
>> an gettin cairit awa as uisual. But I dout I maun be awed
>> tippence-ha'penny bi nou!
>
>What's that in euros?

I dout ye wad need ti raise it bi a negative pouer!

John M. Tait.

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