LL-L "Morphology" 2007.10.26 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L List]

L O W L A N D S - L  -  26 October 2007 - Volume 02
Song Contest: lowlands-l.net/contest/ (- 31 Dec. 2007)
=========================================================================

From: jonny <jonny.meibohm at arcor.de>
Subject: LL-L "Lexicon" 2007.10.25 (06) [E/German]

Beste Lowlanners, Ron,

you wrote:


> Similarly, the obvious choice *Tieding (cognate of English "tiding" =
"news") as a counterpart of German Zeitung 'newspaper' doesn't
> work. So you hear some people say for instance Blatt ~ Bladd 'leaf',
'paper', 'newsletter' (cognate of English "blade"), while other people
> borrow the German word Zeitung. In Middle Saxon, tyding(e) was in fact
used to mean 'news'.

Some time ago I read a text written during the transition phase between
Middle Low Saxon and Modern Low Saxon, in this case between A.D. 1560 and
1640. The text is originating from our region and deals with regulations
regarding dikes and drainage systems.
The _ing_ and _inge_-endings still  had been very common in that time, as
you mention above.

Two special words I remember: 'schoveninge', meaning LS 'Schau' in the sense
of '(annual) control', today mostly used with suffixes like 'Diek(-schau)' /
E: control of the dikes; 'Polder(-schau)' / E: control of the drainage
systems.
The other one is 'bott[h]ing', which could be translated as G: 'Erlass',
'Verordnung', E: 'edict' decreed by a high authority.

So, now my question: is this old -ing[e], which became in Standard German
-ung in its origin denoting a "continuativum" (continous aspect)  like in
English 'he is talk-ing'? Or is/was it in the (continental) German languages
always just a suffix to substantivate a verbum, as de.wiktionary here:
http://de.wiktionary.org/wiki/-ung says?
I for my person see a clear difference between G: '(das) Vorles*en*' and G:
'(die) Vorles*ung*'- the first just any casual incidence, the latter a
continuing, institutionalized line of similar events.

Do we/you find anything comparable in (closely) related languages?


Thanks in award for any answer:

Jonny Meibohm

----------

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

Hi, Jonny!

Like you, I perceive distinct differences between deverbal nouns with -enand
-ung in German. In fact, in many or most cases they are lexicalized
differently, thus require different translations in English and other
languages, as in this case:

Vor dem Einschlafen darf das Vorlesen nie fehlen.
There is no falling asleep without being read to before.

Bei der Vorlesung schlief fast jeder ein.
Almost everyone fell asleep during the lecture.

The common verb is lesen 'to read', and the common prefix is 'fore-' (as in
'before' or 'in front (of)').

Furthermore, I perceive nouns with -en as at least directly linked with, if
not identical to, the infinitive, the only difference being that as a
generally perceived noun it may come with a definite article; e.g.,

Sie mag nicht gern vorlesen.
She does not like to read to people.

But:

Sie mag das Vorlesen nicht gern.
(She does not like the act of reading to people.)
She does not like to read to people. ~ She does not like to be read to.
(This depends on the context.)

Sie mag die Vorlesung nicht gern.
She does not like the lecture.

I think it is rare, if not impossible, that -en and -ung nouns are equal in
usage. At best, there may be marginal cases in which you would use the same
word in English translations; e.g.,

Vor dem Sonnenuntergang ist das Füttern der Kühe nicht erforderlich.
(The ) Feeding (of) the cows before sunset is not required.

Jüngere Kühe benötigen eine zusätzliche Fütterung. ~
Jüngere Kühe benötigen zusätzliches Füttern.
Younger cows require an addition feeding.

As in the case of vorlesen above, lexicalizing often results in nouns with
rather different meanings; e.g., sehen 'to see' > Vorsehen (~ Vorsicht)
'caution', 'circumspection'  v Vorsehung 'destiny', 'providence'.

The present participial "-ing" (as in "the sleeping baby") may be unique to
English and Scots. Or is it?

I think you are right, Jonny, in implying that the time of the demise of
-ing in most Northern Low Saxon dialects occurred during or just after the
end of what is generally known as the "transitional period," ca. 1680-1800.
(I think this was also the gtransition of van to von ~ vun.)  This was the
time of transition from Middle Saxon to Modern (Low) Saxon.  It coincided
with accelerating German encroachment through officialdom and formal
education and simultaneous marginalization of Low Saxon, involving the
abandonment of the language from pretty much all "educated" circles and from
circles that wanted to appear educated.  Especially in surviving letters and
casual notes of the time you notice strong Low Saxon interference and very
awkward, obviously non-native use of German.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20071026/d1d9c5fd/attachment.htm>