LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.11 (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)
=======================================================================

   L O W L A N D S - L * 11 February 2006 * Volume 03
=======================================================================

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Language varieties" 2006.02.11 (01) [E]

I can't find what Gabriele said about this, I think it was lost somewhere
but I'm really interested in it, so maybe you could post it again?
Dear Ron, I didn't take your 'mocking' seriously at all, so I'm not
offended. I already know for long what you think about conlangs, which I
prefer to call artlangs because they're not just artificial but also
artistic. Btw what are the hard to pronounce MS sounds, you mean, not
<ö> [2:] and <ü> [y:] I hope? A Germanic koine without them would be
ridiculous, all real Germanic languages have them, except for Modern
English and Yiddish (and Scots?). So we find these sounds as separate
phenomenons in Low Saxon, German, Dutch, Swedish, Frisian, Norwegian,
Danish, Icelandic, Faroese, Afrikaans, Letzeburgs etc. And even English
speakers can and often do pronounce them (esp outside North America),
although the may have trouble to tell them from [o:] and [u:]...
Or were you refering to <ch> [x]? I think everyone can say Bach or Loch
Ness, English and Scandinavians too.
But, as you know I never said I wanted the world to speak Middelsprake,
like the Esperantistoj or Interlinguistas do. It was merely the joy of
creating an Inter-Germanic language and I'm pretty content the way it
turned out to be, especially the fact that it seems to be so easy to
comprehend at first sight by people who know whatever Germanic language,
yeah, even to a certain level by English speakers. That never happens
when 'foreigners' read a German, Dutch, Scandinavian, or Low Saxon text.
I think it's just fun!
I could make a Low Saxon koine as well, of course, from both German and
Dutch varieties, from Westphalian, Northern, Eastern and other main
dialects, but that would probably be seen as less objective, less
independent maybe and even as a threat for the real varieties. No one
would agree with it, I guess, and they wouldn't have too, because I don't
feel for it myself either.

Ingmar

Ron wrote:
>No mocking was intended, Ingmar and Gabriele, just friendly, light-hearted
>satyrical banter.  Sorry if it came across otherwise to you.  The
perceived
>sharp edge may have been due to a temporary mood with satyrical or
>sarcastic, though rather playful over- and undertones.  (I forgot to take
>off the fake horns.)
>Ingmar, just so you know for future reference, I have no real issue with
>constructing languages, especially if they are meant to be cross-variety
>linguae francae (though I do have a problem with them if they ignore
certain
>varieties, which cannot be said about Middelsprake).  (The only issue I
have
>with Middelsprake is that there are sounds that are hard to pronounce for
>some people.)  I see it merely as a grand-scale, "radical" equivalent of
>creating a cross-dialectical koine, an activity to which I am not opposed
>(and which has applied in all "real," "major" languages), though many
others
>are opposed to it in the case of Low Saxon in Germany.  Creating such
koine
>varieties seems to me related to hypothetically reconstructing
>proto-varieties, except that in most cases it includes abstraction and
>simplification.  I see some educational value in it also, namely as an
>exercise serving to heighten linguistic awareness.
>
>More power to you!

----------

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

Ha, die Ingmar!

Oops!  The text Gabriele wrote seems to be lost.  No!  It is not a Freudian 
incident but is due to a brief power outage this morning.  When power and 
the system came back, the saved version of the message was still there, and 
I assumed it was complete.  Obviously it was not.  My apologies.  Perhaps 
Gabriele still has a copy she can share.  The gist of her message is simple 
and easy: I am a childish playground bully, and she takes a stab at 
invalidating me and my challenges by referring to my upbringing in Hamburg 
and my status as a twice emigrant (which I take as inferring they are to 
blame for the irrelevance of my views, knowledge quest and challenges).

> Dear Ron, I didn't take your 'mocking' seriously at all, so I'm not
> offended.

That's good, and it proves your generosity of character, not to mention your 
sense of humor.

> I already know for long what you think about conlangs, which I
> prefer to call artlangs because they're not just artificial but also
> artistic.

Ingmar, as I said earlier, I have no fundamental issue with conlangs.  I see 
the value of the more thought-out ones among them as being a way of raising 
linguistic awareness, because I am firmly convinced that *any* at least 
halfway serious comparative activity does that.  Furthermore, I appreciate 
the basic spirit, that of attempting to bring communities together on 
neutral ground.  As you can tell on a daily basis, we haven't made all that 
much progress.  Isolationism, defensiveness, xenophobia, self-righteousness, 
ancient grudges and suspicions, ignorance, stereotyping as well as lack of 
mutual sensitivity, courtesy and respect still stand firmly in the way.

The only issues I have with some conlangs are those where, as for instance 
Esperanto, there are claims or endeavors to develop such languages into 
global and intercultural linguae francae when in reality they are culturally 
and linguistically very limited and biased to start with.  While you can't 
accommodate all languages, cultures or just their types, you should at least 
cast the net widely in creating an easy, efficient and widely appealing 
structure and inventory.  I feel that today's International English is at 
least on its way toward cultural integration on a global scale.

In the case of Middelsprake, focus and scope are relatively narrow and, as 
far as I can tell, you have cast your net widely. Furthermore, I've been 
quite aware of the fact that in your case it's a labor of love without 
grandiose goals.  When I suggested fiddling with a cross-Lowlands variety, I 
was mostly joking, but I can see some educational value in such an exercise 
because it requires dealing with both common heritage and "historical static 
interference."  However, at the same time I share your view that the 
educational value would easily drowned by the controversy it would stir up.

> Btw what are the hard to pronounce MS sounds, you mean, not
> <ö> [2:] and <ü> [y:] I hope? A Germanic koine without them would be
> ridiculous, all real Germanic languages have them, except for Modern
> English and Yiddish (and Scots?).

Yes.  Sorry to disappoint you.

> English and Yiddish (and Scots?).

That's a heck of a lot of speakers right there.

Furthermore, among the early Germanic languages there seems to have been no 
sounds like <ö> [2:] and <ü> [y:].  Old Norse and Old English are supposed 
to have them.  In Old Saxon, Old Low Franconian and in Old German they seem 
to have developed much later.

Cheers,
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.
======================================================================