LL-L "Orthography" 2005.08.11 (02) [E/LS]
Lowlands-L
lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Thu Aug 11 17:23:56 UTC 2005
======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 11.AUG.2005 (02) * 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
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.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: jpkrause <jpkrause at sunflower.com>
Subject: Orthography
Ron wrote:
However, aside from that, the phonemics (i.e., underlying sound structures)
actually vary very little from dialect to dialect.
Oh? Convince me. I'll believe it when I hear it.
Jim Krause
----------
From: jpkrause <jpkrause at sunflower.com>
Subject: Orthography
Gabriele Kahn wrote:
By the way, the variety of Lower Saxon in the Solling area is quite
different from what is spoken in Hameln, for instance; it shows much less
Eastphalian influence and is much closer to your "regulation" Lower Saxon
than what they speak further up the Weser.
Not to mention Mennonite Platt.
Jim Krause
----------
From: jpkrause <jpkrause at sunflower.com>
Subject: Orthography
Jefft et 'ne Fiebel irjenwua enne Archiv waut de Learna talle wo daut
behauptet Auljemiene Schriewies brucke? Ekj mott hia bekjanne daut ekj
sie tweefestaundelt hiaäwa:
1. Auljemiene Schriewies mucht goot doone Plaut waut noh Europe räde es,
2. oba waut met Plaut waut noh Steenbach, Manitoba, Kaunada; oda
Hillsboro, Kaunsas, FSA räde es?
Is there a primer somewhere in the archives that tells the student how
to use this alleged Algemene Schryvwese? I must confess that I am of
two minds on this:
1 Aljemiene Schriewies might do well preserving Platt as spoken in Europe.
2 But what about Platt spoken in Steinback Manitoba, Canada; or
Hillsboro, Kansas, USA?
Jim Krause
----------
From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Orthography
Ah, Jim, would that I got a dollar or a euro for every time someone tells me
"But my/our 'Platt' is different," usually implying that it ought to be
exempt from whatever general is being discussed!
Of course all dialects are different! That's why they are called
"dialects."
North Saxon, Westphalian, Eastphalian and far-eastern dialects are very
distinct groups, and the Mennonite ones represent a special group among the
far-eastern ones. However, the differences between all of them are not such
that they prevent cross-boundary listening comprehension. So far I have not
ever come across any Westphalian or Eastphalian dialect that I haven't
understood easily, nor have I had any problem with dialects for the "Near
East," namely Brandenburg, Mecklenburg and Western Pomeranian. So I would
have to be convinced about the exceptional and exemptitious status of
Sollingen Eastphalian, but there appears to be little chance of that, given
its elusive nature.
There is no doubt about the fact that some dialect groups are "out there,"
seemingly being enclaves with strinkingly different features from the rest,
usually because of isolation or, as in the case of Eastern Friesland
dialects, due to a combination of isolation and strong "foreign" (in this
case Frisian) substrates. Usually it takes me a little while (minutes) to
get the hang of understanding them, much like what you experience listing to
an "exotic" English variety. In many cases, this is a case of "gaps,"
namely disruption of the language continuum. Mennonite Low Saxon
(_Plautdietsch_) is a clear case of this. These dialects eventually
estabished themselves as enclaves in Eastern Europe and overseas. They are
not very different from the non-Mennonite dialects once used around the
Vistula Delta. However, those other dialects have disappeared due to
everyone "German" having been expelled from Poland at the end of World War
II and these dialects not being continued in what is now Germany. Had these
dialects stayed where they were and had been continued, Plautdietsch would
now be very obviously a part of this continuum and would not seem as "out
there," with the exception of some Russian, Ukrainian, Turkic and, more
recently English, Spanish and Portuguese, loanwords.
Most of what makes Plautdietsch seem so different is phonological. This is
a matter of a set of sound-shift rules applying and "distorting" the
dialects phonetically. These are for the most part not historical shifts
but are currently applying, predictable rules that the speaker applies
automatically and the non-native listener eventually figures out in
listening comprehension conversion.
I have no difficulties understanding Plautdietsch. You may want to argue
that this is because I am intellectually aware of the rules applying.
However, I had already figured out "the code" before I became intellectually
aware of it. This was also the case with Clara Kramer-Freudenthal who had
no problem understanding Reuben and Irmgard Epp, and other people have told
me similar experiences. Most likely, what helped here was that people that
grew up in Germany and are now middle-aged or older have been exposed to
eastern "accents" and dialects of refugees. They are thus educated in this
regard, "informally" educated by way of mere exposure. For us it is very
easy. We quickly figure out that Eastern dialects (bot Low Saxon and
German) have unrounded the front rounded vowels (üü > ie, öö > ee) and have
change /g/ to [j] in most environments. So, if we hear or read _jreen_ it
is not a stretch to link it with our _gröön_ 'green', _scheen_ with our
_schöön_ 'beautiful'. In the case of Plautdietsch one soon figures out
rules like the following:
* Short /a/ -> au (e.g., Platt = Plaut, dat = daut, natt = naut)
* Short /e/ and /ö/ -> a (e.g., wenn = wann, Bedd = Badd, seggen = saje)
* short /ü/ -> /e/ (e.g., Grütt = Jrett)
* long /e/ -> ä(a) (e.g., gegen, gägen = jäaje, jäajen; Teer, Täär = Täa)
* /g/ -> j before front vowel phonemes (e.g., geven = jäwe, gifft = jeft)
* /k/ -> kj (-> tj) before front vowel phonemes (e.g., Kind = Kjind, Tjind)
* /nd/ -> /nj/ (e.g., Kinder, Kinner -> Kjinja, Tjinja)
* /-en/ -> /-e/ (e.g., gegen, gägen = jäaje, jäajen)
These are just a select few, some of the most obvious.
While experienced North Germans middle-aged and up soon figure out that
Plautdietsch is "extreme" eastern Low Saxon and also figure out the shifts
and rules, most Plautdietsch speakers lack the experience and education that
would allow them to make the mental connections, and the gap looms much
larger in their minds. Why, most of them don't even know that theirs are
dialects of the same language used in Northern Germany and the Eastern
Netherlands, and this applies even to many of those that migrated to Germany
or were born there in recent years.
Furthermore, like most other Low Saxon speakers, Plautdietsch speakers lack
the linguistic understanding (including basic concepts) on which the
creation of an efficient writing system depends. Like others, but due to
isolation more extreme, they attempt to write their dialects "phonetically."
In other words, they try to make their dialects *look* special and
"authentic" by writing as much phonetic detail as possible, detail that has
no place in a "real" writing system. Writing /-er/ as _-a_ is a good
example of this. It is supposed to represent the vowel sound as which /er/
is phonetically realized, pretty much the same realization in pretty much
all dialects of the language. However, in reality it *is* phonemically
/er/, and the /r/ resurfaces if it comes to be followed by a vowel; e.g.,
_De Kjinja senne jrata_ 'The children are bigger', but _de jratare Kjinja_
'the bigger children' (North Saxon _De Kinner sünd grötter_, _de grötteren
Kinner_). The "extreme" spelling of /er/ as <a> would be similar to
representing /er/ as vowels to make English dialects outside North America
and Ireland "appeah moa diffrent than they actchully ah, as a clahss apaht
from the uthah dialects elseweah in the wuhld." This is phonetic detail
that has no place in an ordinary writing system. All the other productive
rules do not need to be represented either. The unrounding shifts may be
treated as historical, and representing them in spelling would make it easy
for native speakers, as it is also done in other eastern dialects.
> Is there a primer somewhere in the archives that tells the student how
> to use this alleged Algemene Schryvwese?
Kenneth worked on it, but it's unfinished, I'm not too happy with it, and
Plautdietsch is not yet included.
Anyway, as I said yesterday:
> As far as I am concerned, this is not about AS. At the end of the day I
> don't really give a rat's behind if the system is based on German, Dutch,
> Meroitic, Egyptian hieroglyphics, Elvish squiggles or apian choreography
> ...
> whatever floats the majority's esthetic and emotional boats. What I
> mostly
> care about is, language-wide, a modicum of cohesion and consistency that
> facilitate not only the writing of individual varieties but also the
> reading
> of other folks' varieties, where cross-dialect reading comprehension would
> be no more difficult than cross-dialect listening comprehension.
In other words, I'm not bent on AS specifically. For me it's simply an
example or template. It doesn't matter what the actual orthographic
symbolizations are, as long as they are (primarily) phonemic and consistent.
Original:
Soon Varjoah kjemmt nich mea trigj,
Uk nich de junge Joahre.
Woo, äwa woone lange Brigj,
Met woon Jespaun kunn eena trigj
Noh siene Jugend foahre?
German-based alternative I:
So'n Verjahr kimmt nich mehr trigg,
Uk nich de junge(n) Jahre(n).
Wo, äver wo'ne lange Brigg,
Mit wo'n Jespann kunn eener trigg
Nah siene Jugend fahre(n)?
German-based alternative II:
So'n Verjahr kimmt nich mehr trigg,
Uk nich de junge(n) Jahre(n).
Wo, äver wo'ne lange Brigg,
Mit wo'n Gespann kunn eener trigg
Nah siene Jugend fahre(n)?
AS I:
So 'n verjaar kimt nich meer trig,
Uk nich de junge(n) jare(n).
Wou, ever wou 'ne lange brig,
Mit wou 'n jespan kun eyner trig
Na syne jugend fahre(n)?
AS II:
So 'n verjaar kimt nich meer trig,
Uk nich de junge(n) jare(n).
Wou, ever wou 'ne lange brig,
Mit wou 'n gespan kun eyner trig
Na syne jugend fahre(n)?
The reason for versions I and II is that the regular rule changing /g/ to
[j] does not apply to German loans, with which Plautdietsch abounds even
more than other dialects of the language. Hence _Jugend_ 'youth' instead of
expected *_Jujend_. The first versions make the difference by representing
the /g/ -> [j] shift; the second versions do not.
> I must confess that I am of two minds on this:
> 1 Aljemiene Schriewies might do well preserving Platt as spoken in Europe.
> 2 But what about Platt spoken in Steinback Manitoba, Canada; or
Hillsboro, Kansas, USA?
I understand what you are saying and where you are coming from, Jim. I
fully understand your doubts and apprehensions, am actually pleased that you
have the gumption to come out with challenges (unlike most other
Plautdietschers who, having brought up as respectful, gentle Mennonites,
prefer to say nothing).
Jim, in my opinion there is nothing very special about Plautdietsch in the
Americas (and remember that now the majority of speakers lives in Germany).
The only thing that is different is that the inherited isolation and thus
the lack of relevant awareness and education is even more accute in
Plautdietsch communities of the Americas. Our Reuben Epp is an almost
unique case, and he acquired his awareness and education by way of
self-motivation and self-study, also in part by networking and reaching out
beyond the front yard fence, simply because he had the insight, inspiration,
interest and "impudence" to follow that path. What he has achieved,
admirable though it may be, is not unattainable for others, be it simply by
following the trail Reuben has blazed. You, Jim, and our other
Plautdietschers on the List are actually doing just that by educating
yourselves and by sending out feelers, albeit tentatively, toward other
speaker communities of the language.
It doesn't really matter if at the end of the day we agree or disagree about
details. What matters is that we connect, exchange information, think about
it, deal with it, hopefully remove preconceived ideas, handed-down myths,
barriers and lame excuses, and gradually cultivate a sense of oneness, of
"language-hood" and community, not only within Low Saxon but within the
wider circle of related languages as well.
Kind 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.
======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list