LL-L "Language policies" 2002.07.26 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 26.JUL.2002 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Web Site: <http://www.sassisch.net/rhahn/lowlands/>
 Rules: <http://www.sassisch.net/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: Simon Hoare <simon.hoare at mail.be>
Subject: Language polices

I once had a Luxembourgish friend. She said that people who speak
Luxembourgish constantly borrow from German and French without thinking
because Luxembourgish just doesn't have enough words to cover every
occasion. She said that people sometimes try to speak or write a "pure"
Luxembourgish but that their invented terms are not always easy to
understand and always sound artficial in any case. The reality (perhaps
like English when you think about it) of Luxembourgish is ultimately
this borrowing quality.

Back to the original subject though: Signposts etc. in Scots.

It's a nice idea and if the Scottish people really feel a need for this
then they should do it. However, I feel that the Scots (like the
Flemish) are far too shrewd to waste money on this kind of exercise.

Regards,

Simon Hoare

----------

From: "Luc Hellinckx" <luc.hellinckx at pandora.be>
Subject: Splitting the atom (in Scots).

Beste leeglanners,

Being a mathematician, specialised in quantum physics, I guarantee that
explaining any kind of 21st century physics (or mathematics) to a 19th
century layman in Brabantish (if that would be feasible), would be far
easier for me than explaining him what psychoanalysis stands for.

Let's have a closer look at a concept like "dimension" for example. If
your
listener can count till 2 it's not hard to tell him the famous story of
the
"Flatlanders" (cognates of us "Lowlanders" ? *s*) being unable to grasp
what
3D is. 4D is no problem either, everybody agrees that time can play a
role.
Making a mental image of this 4D space does not really cause major
problems
either, if you mention "the scanning" technique. Like any 3D body can be
understood by scanning it and slicing it in a series of 2D images; 4D
can be
studied just as well if we intersect (say "cut" *s*) it. The same goes
for
any space of a higher dimension : nothing but "cutting and pasting" (no
need
to mention words like "hyperplane" or show any formula's...moreover,
formula's are just as much Scots-minded as they are English-,
Brabantish- or
Kwazulu-minded) in order to reduce the dimension. If you provide
material
examples your listener will surely not only understand what you're
talking
about, but he might also even believe you *s*.

Personally I consider my chances very slim though, to convert him into
an
avid Freud-fan. Take the psychological term "spleen" for example : not
even
the term nostalgia exists in most dialects. How do I explain the
difference
between all those kinds of depressions ? A depression in a
weather-context
is even unheard of.

Quite a lot of people have a wrong idea of what succesful science is
about,
I think. Anything can be explained in simple terms, it just depends on
the
speaker : he should be able (and willing) to distinguish between
essential
matter and minor details. If he cannot, everything will become blurred.
Choosing good examples of whatever you're trying to get across cannot be
overestimated in this respect. Even a metaphor will help, because if a
"visual" image of an idea is provided, it sticks better to the mind.
A bad speaker on the other hand can easily turn simple things (say :
"how to
start a car") into something very complex. That's why folks with little
"vision" and a high perception of themselves resort to "technical"
babble if they have sphynx-like ambitions, I guess. But I'm sure a
deeper explanation is possible, using words like "frustration" and
"angst".

Some folks have little minimalist tendencies apparently *s*...

No analysis without synthesis...yin + yang.

Greetings,

Luc Hellinckx

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