LL-L "Morphology" 2003.01.03 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 03.JAN.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
 Archive: 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) S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic
                  V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Theo Homan <theohoman at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.12.29 (03) [E]

REFERRING TO:

> From: burgdal32admin <burgdal32 at pandora.be>
> Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.12.27 (08) [E]
>
> > From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Morphology

....[deleted]
> > The first example that came to mind as a possible
> case of true double
> > plural
> > is Dutch _schoen_ 'shoe' > _schoenen_ 'shoes'; cf.
> German _Schuh_ >
> > _Schuhe_, Lowlands Saxon (Low German) /Sou/
> _Schoh_ ~ _Schauh_ >
> > /Söü(e)/
> > _Schöh_ ~
> > _Schäuh_; cf. Scots _shae_ > _shuin_.  However, I
> am not sure if this
> > is
> > true double pluralizing.

...[deleted]
> In my V we still say shoe (or skoe) for one shoe,
> and shoen (or skoen
> or shoes) in plural. So it is really a double
> pluralizing.
> I wonder if  kind-kinder-kinderen ( or kinders) is
> not another example.

> greetings
> Luc Vanbrabant
> Oekene
>
> ----------
>
> From: burgdal32admin <burgdal32 at pandora.be>
> Subject: LL-L "Morphology" 2002.12.27 (08) [E]
>
> > From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> > Subject: Morphology
>
> > The first example that came to mind as a possible
> case of true double
> > plural
> > is Dutch _schoen_ 'shoe' > _schoenen_ 'shoes'; cf.
> German _Schuh_ >
> > _Schuhe_, Lowlands Saxon (Low German) /Sou/
... [deleted]

-----------

Wow. This subject has always been one of my
favourites.
Interesting is that the old plural {kinder / eier} is
still productive in newforming.
So: kind / pl. kinderen / but: kinderspeelplaats
So: ei / pl. eieren / but: eierhandel.
And the time that kinder / eier were normal plural is
very, very long ago. Even my memory is failing now.

Best wishes,
Theo Homan

==================================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>.
 =======================================================================