LL-L "Language varieties" 2004.08.12 (09) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 12.AUG.2004 (09) * 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: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
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: Ben J. Bloomgren <godsquad at cox.net>
Subject: Languave varieties

Hello. I have heard something about the Levenshtein system of
intelligibility. How does it work? I would like to master it to compare
languages. I love intelligibility comparisons because they show the variety
of language.

----------

From: John Duckworth <jcduckworth2003 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Languave Varieties


John Feather said:

"About 25 years ago, visiting Fleetwood, I first heard the usage "I
never go there, me", where "me" is obviously an intensifier. I suppose in
posh English we might say "I myself ...". I took it to be a local idiom but
nowadays it seems to be a fairly common feature of Universal Demotic
English (ie what people learn from watching TV soaps). Is it actually a
northern expression originally?"

John, this did used to be a very common usage in Lancashire, though I think
it is much less common these days. I wouldn't think that it was ever
confined to Lancashire, as I am sure I have heard it in many areas of
England, as well as in Scottish English (as opposed to Scots). Perhaps there
was a kind of Universal Demotic English even before the invention of the
television?

Críostóir mentioned:

"Most of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire uses _sen_ not _sel_ for the
_self_ suffix. I don't see it as peculiar to Yorkshire, although there are
strong similarities (at least to my ear) between north Nottinghamshire and
south Yorkshire speech. "

I only recently visited Nottingham for the very first time, which is
probably why I didn't realize that the _sen_ suffix was used there too, but
it seems that the North Yorkshire dialect used _sel_ whilst the South
Yorkshire one used _sen_. Glenn Simpson says that he hasn't heard the word
_thisel_ in contemporary Northumbrian, but I seem to remember hearing it in
Newcastle, though admittedly from some old people. Could I have been
mistaken?

John Duckworth
Preston, UK

----------

From: john feather <johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Languave varieties

Steve wrote:

"not much is often said about the peculair links between English and the
North Germanic (Scandinavian) languages given the huge influence the
Scandinavians (Danish and Norwgian) have had not only in settling England
but in shaping the structure and form of the English language as it is today
and what gives it that clear distinction from other lowlands languages.
Taking out the myriad latinate and french borrowings English is basically a
fusion of Anglo-saxon (low german) and Scandinavian. Or am I wrong??"

I don't think "fusion" is the best description. We don't observe a mixture
of the characteristics of Old English and Old Norse if we try to identify
what is special and different about Modern English. In fact, there isn't
much that's distinctly Scandinavian in standard Modern English apart from
some vocabulary. The traces of Scand are of less importance than the traces
of Low German in Swedish, say.

The "fusion" description also ignores things which happened _after_ the two
Germanic languages interacted. Major changes took place especially during
the first two centuries of Norman rule, when the conservative effect of the
written form of OE was minimised, and the characteristic continuous
progressive tenses arose later still - 17th century?

Just a small point, but Anglo-Saxon or Old English is not Low German. I
suppose it could be called a West Germanic Language unaffected by the High
German sound shift.

John Feather
johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

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