LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.22 (03) [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)
=======================================================================

22 December 2005 * Volume 03
=======================================================================

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (10) [E]

Ron wrote:
> Perhaps there are mental or
> psychological connections to which I am not privy, but I simply cannot see
> how anyone could even begin to feel threatened by that.  Perhaps it's all
> based on a misunderstanding of intents, of suspecting some sinister plot
> where there is none or objecting to the "un-German" or "heretical" look,
> possibly because of privately held rejection of separate language status
for
> LS.  Is it fear of change in general, one of the most deep-seated fears of
> mankind?

Who is feeling threatened here? Just you, obviously. Try "bothered" on my
part, by the utterly unesthetic look of what I am supposed to accept as "my"
language. I know that orthographies change, but that is usually a gradual,
logical process over centuries (rest assured, even I no longer write
Luther's German), and developed by those to whom the language "belongs", not
the baby of an avid professional  linguist who, for whatever reasons, thinks
that he ought to change the look and feel that native speakers love to yet
another soulless , "logical" construction. Well, there already is such a
thing, as standardised as any linguist could wish for. It's called
"phonetics", and that should be enough.

I must very strongly object to the allegation that you have raised several
times now, that anyone who prefers the current LS spelling does so because
it resembles German (which it doesn't, really, no more than Dutch or even
Latin), making me and others sound like nationalists and worse. We are very
well able to distiguish between German, even the Northern flavours, and LS,
like my 85-year-old neighbour who told me that she, too, "grew up
bilingual" - Platt and German. If the difference and the separate status is
so glaring obvious, then why increase it even more artificially just to
drive home your point and gain some professional distinction?

Mind you, practically nobody these days goes through life speaking Lower
Saxon alone, the people who speak it are German and Dutch. So why would they
not be allowed to write their second language in a way that comes natural to
them? These people speak LS because it is near and dear to them, not in
order to follow and support some political agenda.

You are very welcome to play around with any orthography as much as you
like, as well as make it public, discuss it, have fun with it in all those
special ways that linguists enjoy (just like Tolkien's Elbish and Ingmar's
Middelsprake), but please do not try to push it as an actual standard in
"real life", that's where the fun ends for me and many others.

Actually, how come that Middelsprake is so very easy to read, it's almost
like "stumbling up the stairs" with no effort at all, while Ron's
phonetics-based LS spelling is almost impossible to decipher? I think that,
for one thing, with all those Ys, one mentally expects to be reading and
pronouncing it like Yiddish, not Platt.

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (14) [E]

Ron wrote:
> Our Gabriele wrote:
>
> > In'n Tüddel kummt wi noch lang nich... laat man use Spraak tauvreden!
>
> Actually, what I personally find highly perturbing (and I'll probably have
> to talk to my therapist about this) is the spelling _tauvreden_.  I find
it
> distressingly unorthodox, if not even heretical, for it looks suspiciously
> both Dutch (_tevreden_) and Middle Saxon (_tôvreden_), if not even AS
> (_touvreden_).  Oh, no!  I thought that among Sass's devoted minions it
was
> supposed to be _taufreden_ or _taufräden_ (in other dialects _tofreden_ or
> _tofräden_).
>
> Nein, oh, nein ...

See, there you have it. This happens to me all the time ever since I learned
Dutch 25 years ago, and this is the main reason I usually do not write in
Lower Saxon. But at least you can no longer accuse me of preferring a
"German-based" spelling. :-)

Gabriele Kahn

----------

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (10) [E]

Dear Heiko and Ron,

Heiko wrote:
> This is why I have great difficulties reading your
> ANS-spelling. Johnys mails are hard to read, too. For me it is not much
> easier than reading Afrikaans.
As far as I know you aren't a native speaker of LS. Though I must conceed 
you made really admirable advantages in your knowledge and skill about this 
language I always feel a lack in your relationship to it: you don't love it! 
You don't talk it, you don't think in it, you're unable to understand its 
real character.
I guess your problems to understand Ron's and my postings isn't so much a 
matter of ANS-spelling or whatever you might dislike but the fact, that we 
try to use a syntax according to the special shape of LS.
It's more than just an exact, but cold-hearted translation word-to-word that 
makes a language keep alive; I think you never will be able to become really 
familiar with it without trying to get feed-back: talk it, as often as 
possible, at best every day...!

And: LS for you *just* is a language like others are (as you once wrote 
yourself). For me it's a threatened, wounded part of my culture: 'My home is 
my castle, but my bed is my language'.
I don't feel the same for Standard German, though even more my mothertongue 
than LS, but- it isn't threatened at all, it's mighty by itself, and it's 
controlled every minute by crowds of speakers, of scientists, of different 
institutions.

But- who's still able to watch about good or bad use of LS? Those who could, 
at first the native speakers, don't do it outside their mini-circles mostly 
regarding a more or less small area. It's partly caused by the fact of the 
great diversity of LS, but caused, too, by the fact that they cannot 
identify themselves with any special, totalitarian spelling-rules.
Those who could, too, namely just a handful of real good, competent writers 
don't do it perhaps because of any bad publicity they could fear.
Where, for example, is our Holgert Weigelt, whom I admire for his real 
extraordinary knowledge of *his* EFLS? Too often blamed for his, I conceed, 
very special orthography? Obviously he gave up his 'fight against 
windmills', as Ron liked to say about my own person some times ago.

How often do I doubt because of my own insufficient knowledge of LS, looking 
around for being advertised by other speakers of it! And that's not only 
here, on The List, but as well in my real *daily* talks with friends, 
neighbours, relatives. I'm always grateful for any critics regarding my 
speaking, and I'm always looking for new old words, for new old idioms, for 
everything at the border and within LS.
I try to hand it down to young people in the fashion it *is*, at this very 
moment, and not anything it *could be* after having gone through a 
metamorphosis caused by green theorists who've declared themselves as 
'bannig goude Plattsnackers'.

I feel kind of personal being responsible for my/our language, and arguing 
like above is my way to keep, to conserve an important part of European 
culture. Don't mind, please!

Ron wrote:
> Orthographies are man-made, not god-given.
Tell it the Gods of any online-stuff, tell it the Gods of any 'Duden for 
LS'. But- as it frequently has been with Gods: they don't want to hear the 
twaddle of the earthen folks.

> The AS is merely a proposed, experimental *auxiliary* orthography, mostly
> for the purpose of facilitating cross-border written communication and
> aiding foreign language learners, guiding them through the multitude of
> writing systems for the same language, a symptom of fragmentation that is
> the Achilles heel of the language.  Perhaps there are mental or
> psychological connections to which I am not privy, but I simply cannot see
> how anyone could even begin to feel threatened by that.
Well- how often did you mention this in the past!!!
I must confess it took some time for me, too, to recognize all of this 
(...from Saulus to Paulus ;-)). Perhaps it will remain an experiment 
forever, but it really won't hurt the language as much as wrong items in any 
famous dictionaries.
It sometimes looks like a joke to me to see non-native speakers and writers 
of LS (or something they're doing well and call it 'Platt') following any 
obvious, ridicular missprint like sheep follow their herd.

THAT is the point I suggest, Heiko, you should feel mocked.

Fründlich' Greutens and kind regards

Johannes "Jonny" Meibohm

----------

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (10) [E]

> From: Global Moose Translations <globalmoose at t-online.de>
> Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2005.12.21 (07) [E]
>
> I am amazed that you should not understand the concept of "seeing" a
> language rather than hearing it. I thought this was more common, at least
> among people who thrive on languages. It's similar to the phenomenon of
> tasting colours, feeling music, or understanding the individual
> character of
> different numbers.

You seem to be describing synesthesia here, which isn't the same thing
at all to the semantics-to-orthography coupling you describe yourself as
experiencing. In particular, synesthetic experience is non-specific (for
example, a synesthete might say blue "tastes like banana" but they won't
say blue with red polka dot tastes like "banana with vanilla ice cream
and cat-tail sauce"), while your one-word-one-spelling experience is
very specific.

Descriptions given by you and Heiko suggest to me that you simply read
without subvocalising, so that a small shift in orthography disconnects
you from the meaning of the word, whereas subvocalisers get the sound
from the written word, which connects them to the meaning. You've
presumably made connections directly to the meaning from the written word.

You also describe "reading" words you hear, but that wouldn't seem
unusual to me amongst highly literate people - I seem to remember doing
that at least to some extent when I could hear.

What it doesn't mean is that anyone is entitled to accuse others of
"butchering the language" because they use a different orthography.
Don't forget that this is a languages discussion list and languages such
as Scots and Low Saxon do have orthographic problems which most of us
find difficult to reach an agreement in. It's entirely appropriate that
people use alternative and even experimental orthographies on the list
when they feel some purpose is achieved, because if not here, then where?

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/ 

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