LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.05 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 05.SEP.2004 (03) * 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: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (05) [E/German]

John Feather wrote:
>The French say "n'est-ce pas?" and most Germans "nicht (wahr)?". In S
>Germany, Austria and Switzerland they do things differently, of course. The
>most common word used in this sense is "gelt/gell/gelle".

Actually, "nicht?" or "nicht wahr?" isn't half as common as it used to be.
Most of the time, in Germany, the word added to a sentence for confirmation
in the sense of "isn't it?" is "oder?" (literally: "or?").

Examples:
Du hast doch Butter gekauft, oder?
(You did buy butter, didn't you?) (confirming a fact/theory)

Das sieht doch schon besser aus, oder?
(That looks better already, doesn't it?) (In this case, more in the sense
of: don't you think so, too?)

When my oldest (at that time bilingual) daughter was about two years old,
she used to do the same in Dutch: "Dat ziet d'r mooi uit, of?", "Straks gaan
we ontbijten, of?", etc. - often ending almost every single sentence that
way. She refused to believe that this wasn't correct, since it was perfectly
OK in German.

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: klaus schmirler <KSchmir at online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (05) [E/German]

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

> I got the impression in Austria that "gel" was used very much more
> frequently than "nicht wahr" is used elsewhere but it may have stood out
> just because it was unfamiliar. Whether we use our English varieties of
this
> marker more or less than speakers of other languages I don't know.

Nobody in the south of the German speaking area says "nicht
wahr?". It's either "gell?" oder "odder?" ("oder", short o
-- I learned that in Upper Franconia). The fact that there
is a "polite" form surprises me, but with the Austrians that
might just be possible. I guess going "gell?" when speaking
with an authority makes you look a bit ridiculous/sycophantic.

btw: i know "gelt" only as a written form. Does anybody know
if people really use that? ("gelle" has an eastern flavor;
probably neighbours of the people who say "newwoar".)

klaus schmirler

----------

From: klaus schmirler <KSchmir at online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (05) [E/German]

> From: Jan Strunk <strunkjan at hotmail.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (02) [E]

> So, I propose that your "en" might have developped from a use as an
emphatic
> second negator first in negative sentences.
>
> E.g. jij gaat niet (normal version)
>        jij en gaat niet (emphatic version)
>
> and has spread to positive sentences too.
>
>        jij gaat (normal version)
>        jij en gaat (emphatic version)
>
> I am not totally sure that this is plausible because "en" was a proclitic
> (i.e. phonologically weak element)
> in earlier stages of the West Germanic languages. And such weak elements
> often do not allow for emphatic
> stress... So, there might be totally different history. But it might be a
> possibility. The question, I guess, can only
> be answered by knowing when and where this construction came up and
whether
> there are other possible sources...

Hi,

maybe "emphasis" is just a slight misrepresentation of the
intent? ("Ne" looks so much like a weak negation particle
even to my layman swabian ears that it just has to be the
correct explanation.)

The other description of the conveyed meaning was "no no for
an answer". So just let it be a negation in an uncompleted
threat:

You don't go to church [... and you'll see what happens].

Of course the uncompleted sentence would have to have a
rising intonation...

klaus schmirler

----------

From: klaus schmirler <KSchmir at online.de>
Subject: english periphrastic negation

Jan Strunk had this to say about old negation forms on the
southern coast:

> A phrase like "jij en gaat niet naar de fuif" sounds very much like
examples
> from Middle Low Saxon, Middle Dutch, and Middle High German where
> the old Germanic negative element "ne" was weakened into a proclitic
> version (i.e. one that phonetically leans onto the following word) which
> could
> no longer be used to mark negation of a sentence alone.
>
> OHG: ih ne gango (hope that's right... Don't have a grammar here now)
> MHG ih en gan
> later: ih en gan niht (with second negator)
> today: ich gehe nicht.
>
> The same development as far as I now took place in Dutch and Low Saxon.

I would like to know if there are any sensible theories
about the English periphrastic negation. The only one I know
is Otto Jespersen's. He regards it as the solution of the
conflict of two principles: having the negation particle
close to the verb, and having it as early as possible.
Somehow, I don't find this very convincing.

klaus schmirler

----------

From: Roger Thijs, Euro-Support, Inc. <roger.thijs at euro-support.be>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (05) [E/German]

> From:  I LOST THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE
> > The reason that this happened is, i believe, a grammatical construction
in
> > Limburgish. I hear it very seldom but when i do, it's pronounced loud
and
> > clear. My father is a very cordial man, but when he gets really angry
(i'm
> > less cordial) he inserts a clear, stressed en ( the e like in Eng.
> > pen),between subject and verb. For example
> > jij gaat naar de kerk ( you go to the church)
> > jij en gaat naar de kerk
> > jij gaat niet naar de fuif (you don't go to the party)
> > jij en gaat niet naar de fuif
> > ik ga naar huis (i go home)
> > ik en ga naar huis
> >
Since Limburgish, as a transition area, is a heterogenous group, I would
like to know in what municipality/ies these expressions are used. Thanks.

In my Lonerlands Limburgish I would say:
for:
> > ik ga naar huis (i go home)
Ich goan tos
en when stressing, for:
> > ik en (?) ga naar huis
Ich goan zékèrr tos.

So from where in Belgian or Netherlands Limburg is the father originated? Is
it a general use or rather particular for a family?

Regards,
Roger

----------

From: burgdal32admin <burgdal32 at pandora.be>
Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (05) [E/German]

> From: Jan Strunk <strunkjan at hotmail.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Syntax" 2004.09.04 (02) [E]
>
> Hallo!
>
> Here come my two cents...
>
> A phrase like "jij en gaat niet naar de fuif" sounds very much like
> examples
> from Middle Low Saxon, Middle Dutch, and Middle High German where
> the old Germanic negative element "ne" was weakened into a proclitic
> version (i.e. one that phonetically leans onto the following word)
> which
> could
> no longer be used to mark negation of a sentence alone.
>
> OHG: ih ne gango (hope that's right... Don't have a grammar here now)
> MHG ih en gan
> later: ih en gan niht (with second negator)
> today: ich gehe nicht.
Like in Western Flemich were it still exists:
"Ik en gaon " also" Ik en gaon niet."
'k en doe = E: i do not

groetjes
luc vanbrabant
oekene

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