LL-L "Resources" 2004.01.19 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 19.JAN.2004 (01) * 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: Georg.Deutsch at esa.int <Georg.Deutsch at esa.int>
Subject: LL-L "Resources" 2004.01.16 (05) [E]

Hello!

Ron wrote:
QUOTE
It is great to see that Lowlands Saxon ("Low German") studies are being
offered at the University of Bristol, England, involving real language
acquisition:

http://mail.bris.ac.uk/~gexnl/teaching/niederd.html

Bravo!

Hopefully the introduction to the program will soon be updated to reflect
today's reality: it is not a "dialect" but a *language*.
UNQUOTE

I would doubt if indeed the program will be soon updated accordingly.
If one looks at the  referred web page, the classification as dialect is in
line or (even a consequence) of the obviously accepted definition of a
dialect stated there. I quote from the web page:
A dialect is defined there as a "Sprachform, die [a] mit einer überdachenden
Standardsprache verwandt ist, aber [b] in einem kleineren  Raum als sie
verwendet wird und [c] auch nur von einer kleinen gesellschaftlichen Gruppe,
[d] die aber ein  eigenes Dialektbewußtsein hat. (Mattheier 1998: 96) "
(about: language form, [a] related with a covering standard language, [b]
used only in a smaller area than this standard language, [c] used by a
smaller group with [d] an own consciousness of dialect.)

Next to the fact that I don't think it is elegant to have a formulation
where
"dialect" is inter alia defined by a "consciousness of dialect" [d], I would
not second this definition.
I do not suggest to start here for the umpteenth time a discussion "what is
a
dialect/language". Just wanted to indicate that according to the above
definition not only Low Saxon (and Scots) would be classified as a dialect,
but also Frisian  (or even e.g. Ladians in South Tyrol). Actually, along
this
definition out of the Lowlands' languages I think only English, Dutch and
eventually Afrikaans would be excluded from this definition of dialect.

best regards
Georg Deutsch
(with a special hello to those who still might know me - I have been away
quite some time)

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