LL-L "Grammar" 2003.04.17 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 17.APR.2003 (02) * 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
Archives: 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) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: jari at delphisexpress.com <jari at delphisexpress.com>
Subject: Redundance as a marker of language identity

Hi again!

If it is indeed true that the so-called double negative has normally been
disposed of in written language simply because it is redundant (and not so
much
because it is self-contradictory in terms of formal logic), then the
question
is why Afrikaans written language still hangs on to the "nie...nie". Could
it
be used simply to emphasize the distinction between Dutch and Afrikaans,
thus
giving Afrikaans that coveted status of a separate language, because the
nie...nie does differ radically from what was heard in the Old Country?

French has become a language which just bursts with redundance. One can
hardly
think of more redundance than "qu'est-ce que c'est".

One should perhaps also see the case of "ne...pas" in this light. The
reason "ne...pas" is preserved is not that redundance is required to make
the
negation sound more like spoken language. In spoken language the word "ne"
is
hardly ever used. It is rather to preserve the original, "Latin", negation
to
honour the Latin origin of the language. This is the one instance where
the "Germanic" construction (i.e. "pas" after the verb) - which may even
have
been borrowed from the surrounding Germanic languages - seems more natural
than
the original French alternative.

So that these both cases - nie...nie and ne...pas - may ultimately have more
to
do with the image of the language than any inherent grammatical rule.

Jari
[Nousiainen]

================================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.
 =======================================================================