LL-L "Grammar" 2005.02.27 (05) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 27.FEB.2005 (05) * 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: Jacqueline Bungenberg de Jong <Dutchmatters at comcast.net>
Subject: Grammar

Hello Heather, Ron and Ingmar.
Heather asks in her posting:
German uses nicht dürfen  = mustn't,  can't , to not be allowed to do
something

and                  nicht müssen = don't have to do something

What happened to 'dürfen' in Dutch / Lowlands generally?

Which other Lowland languages have the construction  literally    to have
to = must  ?

The German verb dürfen gets translated as mogen
Dit mag niet ( mogen as independent verb )  That is not allowed!
Dat mag je niet doen (mogen as modal verg)
Van wie mag dat niet? Dat mag niet van Moeder! (Who says I am not allowed to
do this? Mother does!)

If one uses ”mogen” in a positive sense it usually is in the sense of German
“dürfen”
De hond mag hier loslopen ( the dog is allowed to run off leash here )
But there is the rare case that “mogen” acquires the meaning of “to like”
“Ik mag hem wel” must be translated as “I rather like him”

“Durven” on the other hand must be translated as German “wagen” or English
“to dare”
“Zij durft ’savonds niet uit te gaan” becomes “She does not dare to go out
at night”

You must have followed Ingmar’s postings on the use of “niet hoeven’ for “to
not have to”
f.i. “Je moet je tanden iedere dag poetsen, maar je hoeft je haren niet
iedere dag te wassen”
    “One has to brush one’s teeth daily, but you don’t have to wash your
hair every day”

This is fun stuff!

Jacqueline

----------

From:  R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Grammar

Hi!

Jacqueline, you wrote:

> This is fun stuff!

I agree, thanks to Heather, you and others who keep sending us
well-thought-out problems and observations.

> The German verb dürfen gets translated as mogen
> Dit mag niet ( mogen as independent verb )  That is not allowed!

LS (D):
Dat magst nich (doun)!
(magst < magst du "mayest (thou)" -- 2nd sg. often used impersonally, like
English "you" -- omission of the pronoun, as in Dutch, not being an option
as far as I know)

You can also render it this way:
Dat dörvst/dröfst nich.
Dat is nich verloyvd.

> Dat mag je niet doen (mogen as modal verg)

Same as above.

> Van wie mag dat niet? Dat mag niet van Moeder! (Who says I am not
> allowed to do this? Mother does!)

Hmm ... the second sentence is puzzling to me.  How does it work?  ("That
may not of mother")  Does it mean "It (= the prohibition) doesn't apply to
mother"?

In LS (D) I might say:
Wou so (~ warüm) mag 'n dat nich? Mouder mag dat (wul)!
("How so (~ why) may one that not? Mother may that (well = too)!")

(< _eyn_ "one" can also be used as an impersonal pronoun, as may English
"one" -- So LS and English both use "you" and "one" in this way)

So, in Dutch I would have expected something like:
* Moeder mag dat (wel)!

> If one uses ”mogen” in a positive sense it usually is in the sense of
> German “dürfen”
> De hond mag hier loslopen ( the dog is allowed to run off leash here )

LS (D):
De hund mag hyr loos-loupen.
De hund dörv/dröf hyr loos-loupen.
De hund kan hyr loos-loupen.*
("The dog may/can here run-freely.")

So, "can" and "may" are interchangeable in the sense of "may," where "can"
can cause ambiguity out of context, as in colloquial English (where
prescriptionists consider the use of "can" ungrammatical).

> But there is the rare case that “mogen” acquires the meaning of “to like”
> “Ik mag hem wel” must be translated as “I rather like him”

Also in Low Saxon:

Ik mag em (teymlich/recht 'n beten).
Ik mag em (teymlich/recht 'n beten) geyrn.
Ik mag em (teymlich/recht 'n beten) lyden*.

(* lyden mögen < "may/can suffer" = 'like', so originally something like
"can put up with")

But:
Ik kan em lyden/af.
("I can him suffer/off.")
I can put up with him.

Ik kan dat nich lyden/af.
("I can that not suffer/off.")
I can't stand that.

Incidentally, _Ik mag em (teymlich/recht 'n beten) lyden_ can also mean "I
(rather) love him."  In most dialects, the verb _leyven_ 'to love' has
fallen by the wayside.  You can say the above or say _Ik hev em
(teymlich/recht 'n beten) leyv_ or _Ik hev em (teymlich/recht 'n beten)
geyrn_.  I wonder if this has to do with a need to avoid "smoochiness" and
instead understate positive emotions.

And (confusing?) you can use it with infinitives:

Ik mag 's avends (geyrn) uut-gaan.
I like going out at night.

You avoid confusion (with "I may go out at night") by using _geyrn_ (which
signals like).

> “Durven” on the other hand must be translated as German “wagen” or English
> “to dare”
> “Zij durft ’savonds niet uit te gaan” becomes “She does not dare to go out
> at night”

Ah! Different!

LS (D):

Sey waagt sik nich 's avend uut tou gaan.
Sey trout sik nich 's avend uut tou gaan.

(reflexive _sik wagen_ and _sik trouen_ for 'to dare')

Waag' dy dat nich 's avends uut tou gaan!
("Dare-thee that not at-evenings out to go!")
I wouldn't dare going out at night if I were you.
Don't even think of going out at night!
(This may or may not imply prohibition.)

Ünnersta dy dat nich 's avends uut tou gaan!
("Under-stand-thee that not at-evenings out to go!")
Don't you dare going out at night!
Don't (you) even think of going out at night!
(This definitely implies prohibition.)

(The verb _sik ... ünnerstaan_ (= German _sich ... unterstehen_) for 'to
dare' implies impudence, defiance, etc., so something like 'to have the
cheek/gall to').

Ga man 's avends dryst uut!
("Go just at-evenings boldly out!")
Don't hesitate to go out at night!
Go ahead and go out at night!

_Dryst_ (= German _dreist_ but not used in this way) 'brave(ly)',
'daring(ly)', 'bold(ly)', signals permission granted or encouragement ("be
so bold as to", "go ahead and"), usually in combination with _man_ 'but',
'only', like Dutch _maar_; e.g.,

Neem dy man dryst 'n stük kouken!
("Take thee boldly a piece cake!")
Do have a piece of cake!
Go ahead and have a piece of cake!

Also:
(Du) magst dy dryst/geyrn 'n stük kouken nemen.
("Thou may thee boldly/xxx? a piece cake take.")
You may (go ahead and) have a piece of cake.
Do (go ahead and) have a piece of cake, please!

OK, so we keep the snowball rolling ...

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