LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.11.18 (01) [E]

Fri Nov 18 16:08:14 UTC 2005

======================================================================
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)
=======================================================================

18 November 2005 * Volume 02
=======================================================================

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2005.11.17 (07) [E]

From: Brooks, Mark
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.11.17 (06) [E]

Re: Indo-European et al.

I think I remember from my days in college (early '80s) that some of the old
reference books used "Indo-Aryan" instead of Indo-European or Indo-Germanic.
Am I remembering that correctly? If I am, what exactly! would that have
meant?

Mark Brooks

----------

From: R. F. Hahn
Subject: Grammar

Hi, Mark!

Aren't those specifically the Indo-European languages of and from* the South
Asian subcontinent, the languages that the Aryans imported to the previously
largely Munda- and Dravidian-speaking area? At least that's how I use this
name.

(* This includes the Romany group whose ancestors later migrated to Europe,
Africa and beyond. It also includes the Iranic varieties of the Middle East
and Central Asia, including China, and Russia.)

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

I think Indo-Iranian is now preferred fro this subgroup, because of what 
Adolf and the lads did for the word "Aryan".

Paul

----------

From: Paul Finlow-Bates <wolf_thunder51 at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.11.17 (06) [E]

From: R. F. Hahn
Subject: Grammar

I agree about "Indo-European" not feeling quite right either. But, as you
said, it's somewhat better, the lesser of two evils.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

I believe some early works use the term "Japhetic" for Indo-European, to 
parallel "Semitic" and "Hamitic".  The idea was that after Babel the 
different language groups divided according which of Noah's sons - Ham Shem, 
Japhet - the speakers descended from.  I think Indo-European is a definitie 
improvement!

The problem with a geographical name is that it depends on when we are 
speaking about: the "homeland" of the group? (a mountain of books on that 
subject). Where the languages were "traditionally" spoken (whatever that 
means); or where they are spoken now! ? In that case the term should be 
Euro-Global or something.

Given that, for most of their history, these languages were spread across 
Europe into the Indian sub-continent, Indo-European seems as good a name as 
any.  True, they extended well into Asia, and the area includes several 
languages that aren't IE, but "West-Eurasian Not Counting Finland, Estonia, 
Hungary and bits of the Pyrenees" is a bit of a mouthful, I'm sure you'd 
agree!

Paul

----------

From: Isaac M. Davis <isaacmacdonalddavis at gmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.11.17 (06) [E]

Ingmar wrote:

> I think G. indogermanisch or D. Indogermaans originally just were meant
> as: the related languages from the Indic to the Germanic linguistic
> families, so geographically from India until Northern Europe.

Und denn, Ron wrote:

> Ah!  That's interesting.  I never thought about this possibility, always
> assumed it was based on the Germano-centric ideas among German and other
> philologists (beginning several decades before the rise of the Nazis).

Well, if it's talk of a spectrum, I think Indoceltic is as good a name as 
any; easternmost to westernmost. (What? Iceland? Sssh.) When the second 
element is 'Celtic', there's no question that it's not about 
Germano-centrism. The worst allegation you'd get is that it's associated 
with the New Agey, crystal-oriented set, who think that the 'ancient selts' 
built Stonehenge, to align their energies with those of the Sirians.

With all applicable silliness,

Isaac M. Davis

-- 

Westron wynd, when wilt thou blow
The smalle rain down can rain
Christ yf my love were in my arms
And I yn my bed again 

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