LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 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 (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

21 December 2005 * Volume 02
=======================================================================

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2005.12.19 (04) [E/LS]

 Well, unfortunately I can't agree with you totally, Gabriele.
First of all you don't seem to get that Ron's LS orthography is something
else than a standardization of his coastal Platt, but that he just writes
in that variety all the time because it is the LS of his home area.
I think that Ron maybe should write for a while in other LS varieties,
e.g. Westphalian or Eastphalian in AS, to show that AS does not equal
Northern Niedersachsen LS. And please please don't forget that Low Saxon
is not just spoken in Germany but also in The Netherlands, so a German
based orthography divides the language in two.

What would you say if  German in Germany was written as it is today, but
in Luxembourg in French orthography, in Switzerland in Italian spelling
and that of Austria in Hungarian? That may sound ridiculous but in fact it
is what happened to Low Saxon... Why can a language of its own not have
its own orthography, but must it be written in that of other languages
(German + Dutch)?

But I don't say AS is perfect, what you probably dislike most about it are
all the y's, well, for me that is the same. I hardly use them, because my
varieties of Low Saxon don't have all those diphthongs. At the A-site you
can click on the Low Saxon translations of mine and see the AS-versions as
well, next to the Dutch based and German based spellings.

Once again: AS does NOT try to standardize the Low Saxon language itself,
but just the orthography.

Groetjes van Ingmar

>Gabriele Kah(u)n(a) hat geschrieben:

>Sorry, big Kahuna, can't let you get away with this. Whenever somebody
>disagrees with your proposed orthography, it simply means they haven't
seen
>the light and do not understand your superior way of reasoning?
>
>Butchering the look of our beloved Lower Saxon with your "reformed"
>orthography is just a hobby of yours, not a natural consequence of
>linguistic differences. You can experiment with this all you want, but
don't
>expect the actual speakers to go along with this radical and not very
pretty
>makeover (like giving your granny a navel piercing and making her wear
>bellbottoms). You have reasoned before that in your proposed orthography,
>there would still be plenty of room for different local pronunciations,
>varieties and flavours (which frankly I don't see at all, since it is
>heavily based on coastal Platt). So the same should hold true even more
for
>the traditional spelling (even if you do perceive it as German-based),
>because it very easily allows for regional differences.
>
>I know we have had this discussion before, and despite all your previous
>explanations, I obviously still haven't seen the light. Sorry, can't help
>it. We shall probably never see eye to eye on this one.
>
>In'n Tüddel kummt wi noch lang nich... laat man use Spraak tauvreden!
>(Actually, this is already standardised, around here it would
be "Spraok".) 

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