LL-L "Language politics" 2007.12.29 (03) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

=======================================================================

 L O W L A N D S - L * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226

 http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands.list at gmail.com

 Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.php

 Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org - lowlands.list at gmail.com

 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.]

 Administration: lowlands.list at gmail.com or sassisch at yahoo.com


 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  -  28 December 2007 - Volume 03
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
 ========================================================================

From: Diederik Masure <didimasure at hotmail.com>
Subject: LL-L "Media" 2007.12.29 (02) [E/LS]

It's funny ('funny') how they, on their map (
http://www.eurolang.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=22&Itemid=55&lang=en)
put Low Saxon as belonging to the Dutch part only...

----------

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

Diederik,

I suspect it all has something to do with the German contingent of EBLUL (
http://www.eblul.org/) sitting on its hands as well as the "Niederdeutsch"
delegates of the INS (http://www.ins-bremen.de/) not cooperating for the
common good with their counterparts in the Netherlands (
http://www.eblul.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50&Itemid=39)
because they chose to consider the dialects west of the border a different
language.

As I said on previous occasions, all my contacts in Low-Saxon-speaking parts
of the Netherlands are in favor of unity with the dialects on the German
side, or they are at least not opposed to it. In other words, it is not the
touchy situation some people in Germany told me it is. Certainly, I have
never come across the alleged "touchiness" on the *Netherlands* side of the
border (despite exploitation in World War II propaganda), and I am in touch
with many people there, young and old. So I half suspect we are dealing with
an excuse here, at least with a case of avoidance.

Yes, Dutch versus German influences west and east of the border have led to
a measure of linguistic alienation or split, but in my opinion it is not as
serious as some claim it is. Not only borderland organizations but also the
literature prize committee of the Freudenthal-Gesellschaft in Soltau,
Germany, favor at least a collaborative sort of cross-border relationship,
if not full inclusiveness. Three or four Low Saxon writers from the
Netherlands have lately won the Freudenthal Prize, and this (as well as
promotion of "avantgarde" works) proves a lot of courage and progressiveness
on the part of that committee, considering widespread conservatism and
inflexibility around it.

But of course, a major sticking point in (re)unification is the issue of
orthography, what with a Dutch-based spelling system west of the border and
a (rather unsuitable and also inconsistently applied) German-based system
east on the border. I suspect that this, together with the language name
issue, is a main *Bumann* some main players in Germany fear and why they
opted for the territorialist move of shutting the door rather than of
opening it wider for the sake of the common goal of language survival and
promotion. Unfortunately, the widespread uninformed assumption (or rather
red herring) that creating a common orthography equals creating a standard
dialect and doing away with local dialects plays into the hands of
territorialism, thus into the hands of linguistic fragmentation and
eventually language death. Again, my contacts on the Netherlands' side of
the border are far more open-minded about working toward a common,
(re)uniting orthography.

And all this leaves the not inconsiderable speaker communities outside
Europe swaying in the wind and scratching or shaking their heads.
Surprisingly perhaps, some of them have their acts together more than do
those back in the old country.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
_____
*De nie nich na de Kimm kieken deit, de wardt gau sticksichtig.
Those that never look at the horizon quickly grow shortsighted.*

•

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

*********************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071229/951f0bcd/attachment.htm>