LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (11) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 15.OCT.2004 (11) * 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: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen at gmail.com>
Subject: Orthography

For Gronings the pronunciation is as follows

EY

ei mostly in westerwolds and dialects close to germany. ai [Ai] most
of the other places, but also oi in some dialects like Veenkoloniaals.

ÖY

ui in most dialects. söyken (zoeken ~ zuiken) etc.

EE

ee or E:(i)

OO

[o:] [ou] and [O:]. Notice that oo and aa are pronounced the same in
connection with r in Gronings, which is the reason why some write
'roam' (room) and proten (praten).

AA

[o:] or [O:]

ÖÖ

[ø:]

AI

aai [ai]

etc

> ey = [e.I] ~ [E.I] ~ [a.I]

Where Reinhards dialect have ey gronings has [Ai] except in connection
with r where it either has [Ai(@] or [e:]/[E:]

ex. veyr (vaier) (just like norwegian Geir is pronounced like gAj at r/gAjO)
 other in dutch spelling: perbaair/perbaier, meer, peerd...

Where Reinhards dialect has ai gronings has [ai] (spelled like aai in
Dutch):
kaaizer, arbaaid, klaain ...

Where Reinhard has ey most of the dialects in NL has [i:] except in
connection (or in front of) r and s (sometimes also t):

stien, BUT peerd, ien, brief, BUT meester, spiegel, bien, lief, twie,
diel etc which I believe to be the following in Reinhards dialect

Steyn, peyrd, eyn, breyv, meyster, speygen, beyn, leyf, twey, deyl.

>> I understand ANS also has Y [i:] for German/Dutch based  IE.
>> For Lower Saxon writers in the Netherland (like myself) this is a bit
hard
>> to accept.
>> In Dutch, Y is just another way to write IJ [Ei] (like Afrikaans y =
Dutch
>> ij) and in LS this ij is normally [i:], written ie.
>> Dutch tijd [tEit] = DLS tied [tit], Dutch blijven ["blEiv@] = DLS blieven
>> [bli:bM] etc.
>> Using spellings for DLS like  tyd, blyven  would be seen as [Ei] in stead

In most dialects the y has turned into a [E:i] (or similar) after and n or
r:

bakkery, ny, etc.

In most of the dialects of NL (an exception is groningen, but not
Stad-Grunnegs)
y is auslaut is also an [E:i]

thus: mien vrundin BUT mit mij

Groutnis,
Kenneth

----------

From: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen <kenneth.christiansen at gmail.com>
Subject: Orthography

> ex. veyr (vaier) (just like norwegian Geir is pronounced like gAj at r/gAjO)

In Danish that is :) It is pronounced like [gEir] in norwegian or
something similar

Kenneth

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (08) [E]

R. F. Hahn <>
> Hoi, Ingmar!
>
> Thanks for your interest and comments.
>
> The ANS does not have its own pronunciation.  It is supposed to be "above"
> dialects (phonemic), i.e., should be pronounced in whatever way a reader's
> dialect demands.  So far it works at least for the North Saxon dialect
> range.

>>>>> I understand that and appreciate it Ron; I myself also made my own
Hamelandish spelling some time ago.
Hameland/Hamaland is historically the region around the old Hansa city of
Deventer (Salland, prov. Overijssel, NL),
plus the Achterhoek region, i.e. the Eastern part of Guelders (prov.
Gelderland, NL) plus Westmünsterland in Westphalia, Germany.
In this area -together with the Twente region of Eastern Overijssel NL- and
the Southern parts of the land Bentheim in Germany,
share originally a common variety of Lower Saxon.
These dialects are somewhere between Westphalian, Dutch and more Northern
Lower Saxon varieties.
To me they seem quite close to Middle Low German/Middle Lower Saxon, whereas
the Northern Lower Saxon appear closer to
Dutch (maybe more Ingvaeonic/Frisian?) and "more modern"...
But I made an orthography for Hamelandish that was based on the Hamelandish
sounds, not on German or Dutch.
Same as your ANS more or less.

> > I understand ANS also has Y [i:] for German/Dutch based  IE.
> > For Lower Saxon writers in the Netherland (like myself) this is a bit
hard
> > to accept.
> > In Dutch, Y is just another way to write IJ [Ei] (like Afrikaans y =
Dutch
> > ij) and in LS this ij is normally [i:], written ie.
> > Dutch tijd [tEit] = DLS tied [tit], Dutch blijven ["blEiv@] = DLS
blieven
> > [bli:bM] etc.
> > Using spellings for DLS like  tyd, blyven  would be seen as [Ei] in
stead
> of
> > [i(:)] and be far too Dutch for us, even after
> > practice.
>
> I understand.  That's just a case of psychological fixation on being
> different from Dutch.

> By using this symbol you enhance mutual reading comprehension between
> Lowlands Saxon and Lowlands Franconian (Dutch, Afrikaans, etc.).

>>>>> Yes, but why should these dialects be made closer to Dutch etc
and less close to German? Isn't that just the same, fighting German?
BTW how in ANS initial s- is pronounced?
[z] like in German, or [s] like in Dutch and almost all other languages in
the world?
So in that case you should write z-, not s-.
Otherwise the s- is just to avoid Germans to read [ts] for z-, and isn't
that the same as Dutch Lower Saxons would
see Y as [Ei] in stead of [i:]? (Ingmar)

> Rejecting <y> for Saxon on the grounds of its (supposedly different) use
in
> Dutch and Afrikaans is clearly a psychological reaction stemming from a
need
> to be different, a need to "fight" Dutch (or German).  To me this is a
sign
> of immaturity with regard to language assertion and confidence.  ("The
> dominant language uses X, so we can't use X but must use Z to draw the
line
> between them and us.")  The same letter or letter combination is
pronounced
> differently in different languages.  You accept this unquestioningly if
the
> languages involved are "established" and "official," such as when learning
> that English <oo> is pronounced [u:] or [U] rather than as [o:] or [oU] as
> in Dutch, and you accept that German <eu> is pronounced [OI] and not [ø:]
as
> in Dutch and French.  So why can't you accept that <y> is pronounced [i:]
in
> Saxon, [aI] in Dutch, [@i] ([ǝı]) in Afrikaans, [y] in German and
> Scandinavian, [i] in French and Spanish, and [i] or [aI] in English?

>>>>> To be honest Ron, in my Hamelandish spelling I also used y = [i(:)] in
closed syllables,
but i- in open ones. So singular wyf [vif], plural wive ["vi:v@] etc; so
it's not that I am against
y = [i(:)]an sich, but for me as a Dutch Lower Saxon it is _a bridge too
far_.
(I don't mean to refer to WW II here! In modern Dutch this is a completely
normal expression.
BTW, every week I cross the real famous bridge to far, on the Rhine in
Arnhem, a few times, by car or by bike.
It's called De John Frost Brug nowadays, or De Ouwe Brug (the old bridge)
Hartelijke groeten van Ingmar

----------

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

Moyen, Kenneth, Ingmar, Lüyd'!

By the way, where more that one phonetic value was/is given it means that I
tried/try to provide the various pronunciations in *different* dialects of
the North Saxon range, not *one* dialect, and not necessarily *my* dialect.

Kenneth:

> > ey = [e.I] ~ [E.I] ~ [a.I]
>
> Where Reinhards dialect have ey gronings has [Ai] except in connection
> with r where it either has [Ai(@] or [e:]/[E:]

Grongen Saxon is supposed to be included in the range, so it is:

ey = [e.I] ~ [E.I] ~ [a.I] ~ [A.I]

I believe that in Groningen, too, the first vowel is slightly lengthened,
obeying a language-wide vowel lengthening rule before sonorants, i.e.,
vowels, glides, liquids and nasals.

> ex. veyr (vaier) (just like norwegian Geir is pronounced like gAj at r/gAjO)
> other in dutch spelling: perbaair/perbaier, meer, peerd...

> Where Reinhards dialect has ai gronings has [ai] (spelled like aai in
Dutch):
> kaaizer, arbaaid, klaain ...

My dialect does not have [ai]; it has [E.I].  It and Groningen [A.I]
(spelled _aai_ in Dutch-based conventions) belong to the North Saxon
phonetic variant range represented by ANS <ey>.

Where Reinhard has ey most of the dialects in NL has [i:] except in
connection (or in front of) r and s (sometimes also t):

> stien, BUT peerd, ien, brief, BUT meester, spiegel, bien, lief, twie,
> diel etc which I believe to be the following in Reinhards dialect
>
> Steyn, peyrd, eyn, breyv, meyster, speygen, beyn, leyf, twey, deyl.

Correct, though it should be _leyv_ rather than _leyf_ (e.g., _ik hev dy
leyv_ [?Ik hEf di: lE.If] 'I love you' vs _myn leyve kinder_ [mi:n 'lE.Ive
'kI.n3`] 'my beloved/dear children'), and not in *my* dialect but written
for *all* dialects.  In mine they happen to be pronounced:

[stE.In], [pE.I3`t],* [?E.In], [brE.If], [mE.Ist3`], [spE.In], [bE.In],
[lE.If], [tvE.I], [dE.Il]

* Traditional in Lower Elbe dialects: [pi:3`t]

In other North Saxon dialect these may be as follows:
[sta.In], [pa.I3`t],* [?a.In], [bra.If], [ma.Ist3`], [spa.In], [ba.In],
[la.If], [tva.I], [da.Il]

etc., etc.

By the way, _ey_ = [a.I] dialects tend to be also _ou_ = [a.U] dialects;
e.g.,
bouk [ba.Uk] (vs [beuk], [bo.Uk], [bO.Uk]) 'book'

The Lower Elbe dialects monophthongize diphthongs before /r/:

peyrd [pi:3`t] (vs [pE.I3`t]) 'horse'
vourts [fu:3`ts] (vs [fO.U3`ts]) 'immediately'
köyr [ky:3`] (vs [kœ.I3`]) 'choice'

None of this needs to be represented orthographically since it is generated
by variant-specific predicatably applying rules.  By Hamburgers writing e.g.
_Piert_ for 'horse' they throw off readers whose dialects do not have this
rule, whereas everyone would instantly recognize _peyrd_ as meaning 'horse'.

Ingmar, Kenneth, I'd be quite willing to consider using <ii> for [i:].
After all, it's the oldest written form (from which <y> and <ij> developed)
and it would be more consistent with the system:

Long monophthongs:
   Open syllable: a, e, i, o, u, ö, ü
   Closed syllable: aa, ee, ii, oo, uu, öö, üü

Where I now have:
   Open syllable: a, e, y, o, u, ö, üy
   Closed syllable: aa, ee, y, oo, uu, öö, üy

The thing about <öö> and <üü> is that some Netherlanders and one or two
Germans have complained to me that they find double umlauted vowels awkward
to read and write.

<eu> for [ø:] is not an option because people in Germany associate [OI] with
it, and <eu> for <öö> is really an anomale in Germanic, a French device
adopted by Dutch.

<üy> for [y:] has the disadvantage of creating irregularity in the system,
but its advantage, besides avoiding a double umlaut, is that it was used in
Middle Saxon and is a "bridge" to Dutch, Afrikaans, etc., e.g., _lüy(d')_
'people' (cf. D/Af. _lui_), also that it coincides with [ui] in many
Eastphalian and Western Brandenburg dialects ( [luit@] ~ [lyit@] 'people',
spelled <Luite> ~ <Lüite> in German-based systems).

<ii> for [i:] would have the advantage of conforming to the system.  It
would have the disadvantage of seeming "unusual" to Dutch and German
speakers, who would want to write it <ie>.  However, <ii> *is* used
unquestioningly in North Frisian dialects, is clear without explanation and
frees up <ie> for [i:e] or [i:@], thereby making the Dutch-style device <ië>
redundant (e.g., _Belgie(n)_ instead of _België(n)_ 'Belgium').  Another
disadvantage of <ii> may be that in some folks' handwriting it may come out
looking like <ü>.

Ingmar, bear in mind that the ANS *is* a "cross" between Dutch and German
conventions, that it has elements of both, or, better to say, it goes back
to a system from which the other two have branched off and have become
somewhat estranged.  (The ANS is based on the Middle Saxon stage at the time
umlauting had taken place and was shown in writing, first with a small "e"
above a vowel letter.)  Estrangement on the part of Dutch is the
introduction of French <eu> and <z>, which in German have become estranged
by standing for [OI] and [ts] respectively, this making both of them
"touchy" and best avoided.  German has departed from the path by
representing vowel length haphazardly (not as regularly as Dutch and LS do),
using weird devices such as <h> for long vowels (but not regularly, but
unfortunately in my surname ...) and introducing a weird, language-specific
thing like "es-zet" (<ß>, which wouldn't have been necessary had the vowel
length system been consistent in the first place).

Lowlands Saxon has very few instances of /ts/ within the same morpheme.  The
few instances are pretty much limited to loanwords.  In Germany, people use
<z> for it, but that throws off people in the Netherlands who (rightly)
associate <z> with /z/.  So I propose writing <c> at the beginning of a word
and <ts> (rare) elsewhere; e.g., _citroon_ [tsi'tro:n] 'lemon', _cippel_
['tsIpl] 'onion', _verratsten_ 'to fritter away', 'to lose'.   A couple of
people in Germany said that <c> device is weird and old-fashioned (since
<Citrone>, <Cikade>, etc. is archaic German spelling, replaced by <Zitrone>,
<Zikade>, etc.).  To them I say, "Get over it!"

Thanks for your interest, Ingmar!

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