LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.26 (10) [E]

Tue Oct 26 23:46:16 UTC 2004

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.OCT.2004 (10) * 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: Henry Pijffers <henry.pijffers at saxnot.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (11) [E]

Kenneth Rohde Christiansen wrote:
>
> For Gronings the pronunciation is as follows
>
May I add the Twente pronunciation?

> EY
>
I guess it's used in words such as beyn, steyn, etc. In those cases,
it's pronounced in Twente as a nasalised, superlength short Dutch i
(something like stii').

> ÖY
>
> ui in most dialects. söyken (zoeken ~ zuiken) etc.
>
I'd personally write that "soyken", but regardless of spelling, I
pronounce that as a superlength short Dutch u (something like suukk'ng).

> EE
>
> ee or E:(i)
>
Always ee. When followed by final -r as eeah or something.

> 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).
>
In Twente there are 2 different long o's, one's a diphtong (different
from the Dutch diphtong!), the other's a monophtong.

> AA
>
> [o:] or [O:]
>
If I read aa, I'd be inclined to pronounce it as aa, since in Twente we
have that sound too.

> ÖÖ
>
> [ø:]
>
I tend to write that öy (ö short, öy long, u short, uy long, o short, oy
long, etc.) Pronunciation is the same however (like the Dutch eu, yet a
monophtong).

> 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.
>
In mine: steyn, peard, eyne, breev, measter (not sure how to spell that
one though, have to think about that), speygel, beyn, leyf, tweye,
daelle (Twents has the "aesc" sound as in English).

> In most dialects the y has turned into a [E:i] (or similar) after and n or
> r:
>
> bakkery, ny, etc.
>
In Twente it's usually bakkery(j)e, ny(j) (I put the j in parentheses,
because it's pronounced, however I don't usually write it).

grooten,
Henry

----------

From: Henry Pijffers <henry.pijffers at saxnot.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.15 (13) [E]

Kenneth wrote:
>
> but don't you write kaiser? arbaiten etc?
>
I find "kaiser" and "arbaiden" (my dialect has a d there) rather awkard.
I'd write "keiser" and "arbeiden" (and ei (egg), not ai). What versions
are more historically correct?

> Regarding to z or s. Most Middle-age Low Saxon texts that I have read
> use s where Dutch use z.
>
I never use z when writing Saxon, always s, since pronunciations vary.

Henry

PS sorry if this is mosterd na de maaltijd, I'm catching up after a holiday.

----------

From: Henry Pijffers <henry.pijffers at saxnot.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.17 (10) [E]

Reinhard wrote:
>
> I say and write _vrou_ and _bouen_.
>
What made you choose ou instead of au? Why not frau and bauen? Does LS
historically use ou? In that case, I'm switching to ou myself (I usually
write au, perhaps only to be different).

> Kenneth, I think people would just have do deal with not having a "w" at
> the end, just _ou_.
>
My sentiment. The w doesn't add anything.

> Ingmar, are you saying that Drenthe (and other) Lowlands Saxon dialects of
> the Netherlands has *three* phonemes -- w, v, f?  We would want to
consider
> only phonemes, not Dutch orthography quirks.
>
Yes, three, Twente too has w, v and f in pronunciation (in writing one
might prefer to use only v).

grooten,
Henry

-----------

From: Henry Pijffers <henry.pijffers at saxnot.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2004.10.18 (02) [E]

Reinhard wrote:
>
> In a spelling system that allows dialectal variation with maximal
> interdialectal reading comprehension (which is what I propose), we would
> therefore have to free up the <v> for the /v/ of the Netherlands and write
> <f> for what is true initial /f/ in all varieties.  What do you think,
> Kenneth, others?  This, together with <ii> makes the system look more and
> more like North Frisian.
>
I'd say simply use v only, people will use their preferred pronunciation
anyway. Mind you, a writing system is not a pronunciation system.

regards,
Henry

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <lowlands at lowlands-l.net>
Subject: Orthography

Moyen, Henry!

> Reinhard wrote:
> >
> > I say and write _vrou_ and _bouen_.
> >
> What made you choose ou instead of au? Why not frau and bauen? Does LS
> historically use ou? In that case, I'm switching to ou myself (I usually
> write au, perhaps only to be different).

The main phonetic realizations of this sequence are [u:], [o.U] and [a.U] --
so it's phonemically /uu/ or /ou/ (~ /au/).

Old Saxon has _frūa_ and _būan_, in Middle Saxon _vrû(we)_ ~ _vrô(we)_ and
_bû(w)en_ ~ _bô(w)en_.  So, writing _uu_ or _ou_, depending on dialect type,
seems reasonable.  The _ou_ type group is subdivided into those that realize
it as [o.U] and those that realize it as [a.U].

Analogously, there are _y_ (_ii_) and _ey_ type dialects in words like
_ny(g)_ [ni:(G)] and _ney_ [nE.I] ~ [na.I] 'new', _vry_ [fri:] and _vrey_
[frE.I] ~ [fra.I] 'free'.

The _ou_ type dialects have this sequence fall together with _ou_ in words
like _bouk_ [bo.Uk] ~ [ba.Uk] (< MS _bôk_ < OS _bōk_) 'book', while the _uu_
type dialects keep them distinct: _vru_ and _bouk_.

> I'd say simply use v only, people will use their preferred pronunciation
> anyway. Mind you, a writing system is not a pronunciation system.

You speak my language now, buddy!  :-)

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