LL-L "Language learning" 2005.11.30 (01) [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)
=======================================================================

30 November 2005 * Volume 01
=======================================================================

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2005.11.29 (01) [E]

> From: "Paul Tatum" <ptatum at blueyonder.co.uk>
> Subject:  LL-L "Language learning" 2005.11.28 (06) [E]
>
> though spelling does often change when the writing material changes,
> like the change from manuscript to printing. What about txt msgs in
> languages other than English? Are Dutch, German et al. showing the same
> sort of abbreviations, etc?

j0, lowland d00dz! (or shd that be lol& d00dz, lol!) maybe we shd
arrange an i18l txtspk day on teh 1337!

maybe i shd do a txtspk v. of teh wren lol! otoh tbh i cba soz  :)

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cochlear_my_eye/

----------

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2005.11.29 (01) [E]

> From: "heather rendall" <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
> Subject:  LL-L "Language learning" 2005.11.28 (06) [E]
>
> Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
>
>>  Perhaps we're all just old and out of touch?<
>
> I read a report in a newspaper that an American publisher was going to
> allow 'I would of' in future because ' so many people say and use it and
> languages are always developing'.
>
> I am all for not fossilising language BUT there are surely some limits as
> to allowing development to be based on ignorance or lack of
> understanding??????

So sure you're right, are you? That's a warning sign for a start  :)

As I've said before, the use of "of" as an auxiliary has a venerable
history. The American short-story writer Sherwood Anderson used it
copiously as part of what otherwise seems to be pretty much standard
English. As he was a newspaper editor most of his life, not to mention
the fact that he's acknowledged as one of the great short-story writers,
I don't think it's as easy as all that to dismiss it as ignorance.

It seems to me from reading blogs that so many people write "of" because
they think of it as that word, not as some sort of misspelling of
"have". There are people who use it quite consistently amongst excellent
English prose. It seems that it's quite an old written usage that we're
not widely familiar with only because of publishers blocking it because
they follow Strunk and White too slavishly, and yet it arises time and
time again in writing because that's how many English speakers think. We
come to a pass where it's hard to argue because, the writers involved
are, after all, native speakers of the language writing an honest
representation of the language as they see it. You could even argue that
the only ignorant people are those who mistake grammar for language and
think that exceptions and complicating factors must be wrong. A bit like
using a map to get somewhere and then complaining because there's a cow
in the road that's not on the map. The road is _not_ the map!

I understand people who like to think of standard grammars as the
language. It would make everything so easy if the road _were_ the map:
then I wouldn't have to deal with snow, darkeness, sharp bends 25%
gradients, traffic lights, one-way systems and other drivers. Oh, and
every road would be about a mile wide!

It's all very well writing up neat grammatical paradigms and saying that
"have" slots in here and "of" doesn't, but there's prescriptivism and
descriptivism and and it's more swings and roundabouts (or blogs and
books) than one or the other.

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/
http://www.livejournal.com/users/cochlear_my_eye/

----------

From: Obiter Dictum <obiterdictum at mail.ru>
Subject: LL-L "Language use" 2005.11.29 (03) [E]

>   am not sure but wasn't this the case with the Chevy Nova as well? In
> colloquial
> South American Spanish Nova - No Va  as in no go?
>
> Remember the Japanese STARION automobile some years ago now ?
> Not an attempt to combine chemistry and astronomy but a mistaken
> variant on STALLION,
>
My two cents: Speaking of Japanese cars - remember Mitsubishi Pajero's 
marketing failure in Spain? Or was it a Latin American market?:)

----------

From: Ian Pollock <ispollock at shaw.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Language use" 2005.11.29 (03) [E]

From: "Ian Pollock" <ispollock at shaw.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Language use"

> From:  "Larry Granberg" <nibwit at yahoo.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Language use" 2005.11.28 (8) [E]
>
>  am not sure but wasn't this the case with the Chevy Nova as well? In
> colloquial
> South American Spanish Nova - No Va  as in no go?

Nope, this is a myth. The car sold just fine in Spanish speaking
countries. It was obvious to them as it is to us that "nova" in this
sense conveys a notion of "new" - after all, they have words like
"novato" (novice), "novedad" (newness), etc. And "no va" is not
colloquial Spanish, it's perfectly neutral.
Salud!
-Ian Pollock 

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