LL-L "Orthography" 2005.08.12 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 12.AUG.2005 (01) * 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: Luc Hellinckx <luc.hellinckx at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography"

Beste Ron (en andere leeglanners),

Consider the Dutch phrase:
"We moeten daar eens goed over nadenken" ("We'll have to give it some more 
thought")
Using English orthography it would become:
"Wuh mooten daar is hood over nah-denken"
Rechtschreibung, German style:
"Wö muten dahr is chut over nah-denken"

OK, I know a Dutch "g" is a Dutch "g", and even the initial "h" of "huge" 
doesn't come close, but in most European languages, spelling never fully 
matches phonetic reality. I therefore consider spelling as a trade-off 
between the spoken language and a world of pictures. Yes, pictures. Once you 
know how to read a language, you don't really read words, letter by letter, 
do you? Rather will you look at the whole word instantly.

Let me try Dutch orthography for my dialect now. When I write "Waele mutte 
daa ne ki goe over naapaazn" (Brabantish for the sentence above); I have 3 
problems: "ae" does not exist as a diphtong (you will only find it in family 
names,  because in the past it used to represent long "a" in older 
spelling...which is not what I want). However, if you read precisely what is 
written: "ae" = "a" + consecutive "e", you do get close to the sound that 
I'm trying to spell. Problem number two is "naapaazn". Even though you see 
"aa" twice, they don't sound the same in reality; as the first "aa" should 
be slightly higher-pitched. I could try accents, making something like 
"nààpaazn", but I don't like this. First of all, because it makes reading 
for foreigners a lot more difficult (and I want to treasure every single 
person that is interested in my minority language) and secondly, because it 
enhances what I would like to call "peculiarism" ("particularisme" in 
Dutch). I don't consider it wrong at all to feel peculiar, special, 
extraordinary and even proud if you know how to speak a certain dialect 
well, but if this is the only reason why you would like your dialect to 
survive, I think you're going to fail. At the same time, one should also 
investigate the similarities between one's pet language and the standard 
(power) language that is "ruling" it. And to some degree, spelling can 
reflect that relationship. Bear in mind, that there are usually good reasons 
why power languages have become such. Maybe not if it happened overnight, 
but certainly if they have been taking charge for centuries.
My third problem is that many people will surely become confused when they 
see "goe", because the pronunciation of "oe" will be unknown for them or 
plain wrong.

Actually, I could write my Brabantish sentence better in English or in 
German based spelling (than in Dutch), as it would become something like:
"While-le mitte daa ne key hoo over nah-paasn" and "Weile mütte da ne ki 
chuh over nah-pasen" respectively.

I know that in the past in many languages, so called "taal-architecten" have 
tried to rebuild/restore/renovate their language (in all kinds of ways). Who 
were they adressing? Mainly other scholars. Plastic surgery for the 
linguistic incrowd. In the Dutch/Belgian case, 99% of the rest of the people 
were not even aware of what was happening above their heads, let alone used 
their recommendations. And if they ever did get in touch with this polished 
version of their native speech (court, town hall), they often mocked them, 
viewing them as renegades (the other way round, too of course: considering 
them boorish). Don't let me be misunderstood, I'm not trying to support or 
attack any of these groups (literate/illiterate), I'm just trying to point 
out that their worlds were very far apart.
On a different level: Esperanto for example never broke 
through...why?...well, where's the cultural component of that 
(artificial)-language?

I, for myself, have always wondered if my Brabantish would be understood by 
a late medieval Brabantish person (and vice versa). Frankly, I think it 
wouldn't pose any problem. The very slow evolution of dialects here shows 
that a linguistic change which has not been triggered/borne by a significant 
economic/cultural/social modification of society, is doomed to be of 
interest only for literati. Again, I love the literary world just as much as 
I love every other social niche, but too often it seems that very few people 
are actually keen to grasp and accept the differing, specific linguistic 
needs that some of their fellow men may have.

Moreover, given the fact that many people (all over the world) are quite 
familiar with English and German spelling, this means that if you would 
choose English or German orthography for Saxon, your chances of being read 
(fluently) would definitely multiply.

In short, I would opt for the orthography of an existing major language, 
rather than resort to a new system (that will surely be very carefully 
thought-out, but probably lacking in terms of PR).

Kind greetings,

Luc Hellinckx

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