LL-L "Semantics" 2004.01.24 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 24.JAN.2004 (04) * 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: Margaret Tarbet <oneko at att.net>
Subject: Lexicon

Floor and then Sandy wrote

>> The confusion may have risen from:
>>
>> "A lot of people are ... " where probably gramatically more
>> correct would be
>> "a lot of people is ...".
>
>I don't think it's the same thing - I've worked with software
>engineering documentation for a long time and this is the one
>grammatical problem that occurs again and again. When asked to
>correct it there's often confusion as the writer reads his
>sentence over and over again, trying to decide which form of
>the verb is right. On the other hand I'd say "a lot of people
>is" would be obviously wrong to them. I think it's simply the
>proximity of the misapplied noun to the verb which causes the
>problem.

A quote from Fowler (Modern English Usage, second ed.) might be
useful here:

(pgs 402-3:  Number)
6.  Nouns of multitude, etc.
(a) Such words as army, fleet, Government, company, party, pack,
crowd, number, majority, may stand either for a single entity or
for the individuals who compose it, and are called nouns of
multitude.  They are treated as singular or plural at
discretion--and sometimes, naturally, without discretion.  'The
Cabinet is divided' is better, because in the order of thought a
whole must precede division; and 'the Cabinet are agreed' is
better, because it takes two or more to agree.  That is a
delicate distinction, and few will be at the pains to make it.
... In general it may be said that while there are always a
better and a worse in the matter, there are seldom a right and a
wrong, and any attempt to elaborate rules would be waste labour.'

The only case I can think of where 'a lot of X is' wouldn't sound
terrible is the case where X is never used in the plural.  'A lot
of rice is stripped of nutrients during processing',  'a lot of
shrinkwrapped software is unusably buggy',  'a lot of fish in
one's diet is usually healthier than the same amount of beef'
(especially these days!), etc.   But 'a lot of fishes are on the
brink of collapse from human commercial predation'.

Margaret

----------

From: Heiko Evermann <Heiko.Evermann at gmx.de>
Subject: LL-L "Language policies" 2004.01.24 (01) [E]

Hi Ron,

I have had a look at http://www.onzetaal.nl/tp/?tp=2321

Isn't it funny that it says that Bookmaal is smoken in the towns,
whereas Nynoorsk is spoken in the "platteland". I didn't know that
Norway was flat. I always thought it had a lot of mountains.

Heiko Evermann

----------

From: R. F. Hahn lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Subject: Semantics

Heiko, Folks,

Yes, it seems curious to non-native speakers to find the Dutch word for
'countryside' and 'hinterland' to be _platte land_ or _platteland_,
literally "flat country/land" when it does not apply to flat land.  I was
quite entertained when I read the same word used the same way in Afrikaans
with reference to hilly terrain within the same sentence.  I am sure that
native speakers are not as entertained by this.  In fact, I assume that they
hardly ever truly think about the etymology.

I think this is an excellent example of loss of semantic value in the cause
of generalization.  To people in the Low Countries, "countryside" and "flat
land" are synonymous within the context of their homelands.  The word
_platteland_ then came to be applied without actual reference to flatness.

Note that this did not happen in most Lowlands Saxon (Low German) dialects.
(I am not sure if it did in some.)  Undoubtedly this is because the
LS-speaking area does not entirely, though predominantly, consist of flat
land.  Or is it because of German influence?  When we say _plat land_ or
_platland_ we usually mean "*flat* land" or "plains."  The more general word
would be _land_, often used in special expressions with archaic morphology,
such as _up'n landen_ (<_up'n Lannen>) 'in the country' and _vun'n landen_
(<_vun'n Lannen>)  'from/of the country'.  (_Up dat (~ 't) land_ would mean
'on the land (= soil)', and _vun dat (~ 't) land_ would mean 'from the land
(= soil)' or 'from the country (= nation)'.)

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