LL-L "Orthography" 2003.10.07 (06) [E]

Tue Oct 7 18:27:09 UTC 2003

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 07.OCT.2003 (06) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
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
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
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: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Administrativia" 2003.10.07 (04) [E]

Mike,

who was "telling the scientists off"? Not me... so it must have been Ron.
You shouldn't be so hard on him, though, the man is doing his best. And he's
already so confused that he thanked Anja for my contribution. :-)

I'm not sure I like the idea of taking the "scientific" approach for
defining an orthography. That's the way linguists put together Esperanto,
which no-one really uses for anything. The German orthography was basically
defined by Martin Luther through his bible translations, with some small
modifications made later for convenience (like taking the "h" out of many
words that contained the combination "th" (in German, the "h" does not
modify the pronunciation of the "t"). So why can't we just settle for the
spelling of Klaus Groth or Fritz Reuter, for instance, if it must be?

Frankly, to me, one of the reasons I never post in Lower Saxon is that it's
nobody's business how I spell it. It's that "intimacy" thing again. I'm a
very visual person, and I see every word spelt out in front of me as I say
it. So don't ask me to change my mental dictionary - Platt would lose a lot
of its flavour for me.

Don't get me wrong. I also like the scientific part of linguistics,
especially word roots, and I would never deny its value. But I think the
language should come first; linguists are very welcome to research it to
their heart's content, but is it really a good idea if they try to use their
findings to ALTER it "scientifically"?

By the way, the local newspaper in Hameln (on the Weser river, of Pied Piper
fame), the Dewezet (Deister- und Weserzeitung), used to run a daily
humourous Lower Saxon column until at least 25 years ago. The (consistent)
spelling they used was very different from anything I've seen on this board,
reflecting the different flavour of Platt spoken in the area. I wonder
whether they have those columns on archive. If I find the time I can
inquire.

Gabriele Kahn

----------

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

Gabriele:

> And he's
> already so confused that he thanked Anja for my contribution. :-)

Oops!  Sorry to both of you.

> Don't get me wrong. I also like the scientific part of linguistics,
> especially word roots, and I would never deny its value. But I think the
> language should come first; linguists are very welcome to research it to
> their heart's content, but is it really a good idea if they try to use
their
> findings to ALTER it "scientifically"?

All orthographic systems were deviced "scientifically," i.e.,
systematically, at some point in time.

The case of LS is different in that it had its own basic native system (with
similar systems used in closely related languages) but with Germanization
and minoritization had foreign, German-based systems imposed on it.  In
addition, those that devised these German-based systems had little or no
basic understanding of phonological principles (and using "scientific" here
would really be an overstatement, because we are talking about stuff I could
easily teach people within 15 minutes).  As a result the systems ignore
distinctions that do not exist in German but do exist in LS, and on the
basis of German it makes distinction that do not exist in LS.  Furthermore,
there is the inclination toward trying to write dialects "phonetically,"
something that ought to be left to auxiliary systems, for instance where
dialects are compared.

The overall result is fragmentation, fragmentation between dialects and
fragmentation between the LS communities of Germany and the Netherlands,
which makes interdialectal and international written communication more
difficult than it needs to be.

No, a uniform system does not mean that dialectal writing would fall by the
wayside, that some sort of Esperanto would be created.  This is merely a
made-up, much exploited bogeyman.

Another result is a mixture of confusion and intimidation.  Systems compete
with each other, and orthography is a free-for-all.  The ordinary speaker is
led to believe that those who do write and publish know what they are doing,
and this along with lack of guidance and cohesion weakens the "ordinary"
person's confidence in writing.  Your guess is as good as mine as to how
many potential LS writers never get over that initial hurdle.  Some of them
tell me that they would like to write but "don't quite know how to spell"
and are "afraid others will laugh about the way they spell."  As we have
said many times here, none of this is necessary, for a simple cross-dialect
set of rules would solve all these problems.  The main stumbling blocks to
acceptance are prejudice and suspicion, based on a deep-seated sense of
fear -- fear of new things and fear of failure -- deflected by blaming
external forces, such as the evil scientists that want to tinker with stuff
and burden people with learning, and blaming all those people out there
deemed likely to tear one's written work to shreds.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

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