LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.06.27 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 27.JUN.2002 (01) * 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: Gary Taylor <gary_taylor_98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language Samples

Dear All,

Ron said:

>Say, Gary, aren't [v] and [f] options for _th_ in
>Estuary English?  Or
>is that considered sub-standard?

It would be just in the boundaries of Estuary, but
definitely at the London end of the scale. At my
school where I grew up, I can only remember one pupil
there that substituted v and f for th, and I know in
the cruel way of children that we used to 'take the
mickey out of him' - tease him.

My mother always used to correct me when I used this,
and also when I used a glottal stop between vowels, as
this wasn't considered 'refayned' enough. However,
since she never made comments about my glottaling of t
pre-consonantally, my difference in pronunciation
between 'board' and 'bored', or my l-vocalisation,
these are features which I've retained. It's only
since teaching English as a foreign language that I've
tried to reinsert my 'l's. (I have to admit though
that this means that I tend to be hypercorrect when
teaching at times and sometimes pronounce words like
'walk' with an l!)

The rules for f and v substitution would be as follows

th substituted by f in all positions, think > fink,
path > pahf

dh substituted by v when non-initial, mother > muvver,
bathe > bave

dh omitted when word initial, this > is, that > a?.

Also on the Swadesh list, I made a mistake, and I
wrote 'fat' as 'f@?' this should have been 'fä?',
sorry

Gary

----------

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

Thanks, Gary!

The two places where I noticed /D/ -> [v] and /T/ [f/ were London and
Australia, among then young people (mid-1960s-mid-1980s).  In Australia
it did not seem to be an areal feature but a social one.

I'll correct the mistake on the list later today, will also add
Criostoir's Nottingham English items.  Holger's Eastern Friesland ones
are already up.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

----------

From: Gary Taylor <gary_taylor_98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Language Varieties

Dear all

Glenn wrote:

>097: good - gurd

Glenn - quick question - I thought Northumbrian
English was rhotic (pronounced the 'r's in all
positions with a uvular r unique in England to to the
North East). From your spelling of good as gurd and
also you wrote feather as -er or -ah does this mean
this 'r' is disappearing in the region or are my
sources incorrect?

Gary

----------

From: "Marco Evenhuis" <evenhuis at zeelandnet.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2002.06.26 (06) [E]

Criostoir wrote:

> I can say with certainty that
> the Nottingham variants derive almost entirely from a
> West Germanic base (although phonology retains
> substantial North Germanic remnants, I'm certain).
> Vocabulary in particular is heavily influenced by what
> appears to be either Zeelandic; grammar is less
> obvious.

I think that in respect to vocabulary, you could
put the lable 'ingvaeonic' on these northern English
variants you mentioned. I mean, you say that voca-
bulary is heavily influenced by Zeelandic and ?Frisian?
(I think you forgot a word there). These languages
are about the most 'ingvaeonic' of all present day
(mainland) West Germanic languages.

> My question is this: if Nottingham English is
> descdended almost entirely from a Franconian or
> Ingvaeonic mileau (someone will have to precisely
> reiterate the differences to me again, I'm afraid),
> does any of it at all descend from the Scandinavian
> (presumably proto-Danish or Jutish) spoken in the
> Danelaw?

When I was on the Shetlands, I was surprised to
hear the same word for 'back' being used as in
Zeelandic: _rik_ (I believe it is spelled _rigg_ in
Shetlandic). This _rigg_ in Shetlandic is said to be
of Norse descent, but if the same word was to be
known in Nottingham English as well, would it
be a Norse or Northern Germanic loan or an Ing-
vaeonic ('Zeelandic') one? I think it is very difficult
to tell if certain elements or words in a language
clearly derive from another certain language. Only
relatively young borrowings can easily be traced, I
guess.

Regards,

Marco

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