LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.12 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  12 October 2007 - Volume 01
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Language politics" 2007.10.11 (01) [E]

Well, I'm not against the whole Nynorsk model _an sich_, I just wanted to
point out a few significant differences with the Low Saxon orthographic
and linguistic situation. I doubt if Nynorsk allows so much variation that
would be needed in LS.
How much dialectical variation can a language handle, if we still want to
call it ONE languages?
E.g., only the simplest basics are so diverse already in different LS
regions; just speaking of LS in the Netherlands we have for "you are":

dou buste
doe bis
doe zis
do zus
ie bint
ie binnen
ij bunt
jij bent
jie bun
jo binnen

etc.

for "girl"

maagien
wicht
deerne

etc.

sweet good song (dim.)  can be

zeut good leedeken [2:] [o:] [e:]
zuut goed liedtien [y:] [u:] [i:]
zuit goud laidje   [9Y] [aU] [aI]

etc.

There are dialects with two or with three grammatical genders, with
diminutives ending in -tie/tien, or -ke/ken, or -tje/tjen, with or without
umlauting.

Let alone the even greater differences with the LS varieties in Germany...
Of course, having one orthography for LS is technically possible, but if
that will bring standardisation closer?

Groeten,
Ingmar

Ron wrote:
Thanks, Ingmar. That's a very well thought through and compelling set of
arguments against using Nynorsk as a model.

Whilst I agree with you regarding orthography (and I hadn't really intended
to use Nynorsk as a model for orthography per se) and interrelations with
the power language and the absence of an international border, I still
think that with regard to setting only a loose grammatical and lexical
standard and thereby leaving room for dialectical variation in writing it
offers something of a model, since the main argument against a standard in
the Low Saxon community has been concentrating on opposition to forced
constraints and possible loss of diversity. This is why I brought the
Nynorsk case up in the first place.

I(ngmar Roerdinkholder) wrote:
Ron, I think we can not really compare the Nynorsk (New Norwegian)
situation with LS. First, Nynorsk is spoken only in one country, Norway.
LS in Germany and the Netherlands (and some more). Second, Nynorsk
orthography is no big problem: it just uses the general spelling used for
Standard Norwegian as well, which is fit for both languages. German and
Dutch have quite different orthos, and they're both not really fit for LS.
Third, Nynorsk and Norwegian are much closer to eachother than Low Saxon
and German. Actually, Danish and Swedish are too. Fourth, Standard
Norwegian was adapted to be closer to Nynorsk itself in the past. Fifth,
the West Norwegian dialects, which formed the bases for NN, are not by far
so diverse as the Low Saxon ones are. Sixth, Nynorsk is spoken in a
relatively compact area. Etc. Still, Nynorsk isn't very successful

Ingmar

----------

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

Thanks, Ingmar.

Of course it looks weird when you pick stuff out of context. ;-)  But you
and I know that both you and I understand those at least within context.
Right? And a uniform method of spelling would at least take the edge off.
Just as an example (not necessarily the solution):

NL:
dou buste du büste
doe bis du bis
doe zis du sis
do zus do süs
ie bint y bint
ie binnen y binnen
ij bunt iy bünt
jij bent jiy bent
jie bun jy bün
jo binnen jo binnen
D:
du büst du büst

NL:
maagien magyn
wicht wicht
deerne deerne
D:
Deerne deyrne
Deern deyrn
Diern deyrn (~ dyrn)*
Wicht wicht
Mäken meken

NL:
zeut good leedeken [2:] [o:] [e:] soet good ledeken
zuut goed liedtien [y:] [u:] [i:] suyt guud lydtyn
zuit goud laidje   [9Y] [aU] [aI] soyt goud leydje (~ laydje)**
D:
sööt goot Leedje [9I] [OU] [EI] soyt goud leydje
seut goot Leed [OI] [OU] [EI] soyt goud leyd
seut gaut Leiding [OI] [aU] [aI] soyt goud leyding (~ gaud layding)**
etc. ...

* Lower Elbe dialects /eir/ -> [i:3] by rule (elsewhere [EI3] or [aI3]) --
phonetic detail not necessary to be distinguished in writing

** oy = consistently [9I] or [OI], and ey = [EI] or [aI], depending on
dialect -- phonetic detail not necessary to be distinguished in writing

Kumpelmenten,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071012/09fe1be3/attachment.htm>