LL-L "Orthography" 2008.12.24 (02) [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 - 24 December 2008 - Volume 02
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please set the encoding mode to Unicode (UTF-8).
If viewing this in a web browser, please click on
the html toggle at the bottom of the archived page
and switch your browser's character encoding to Unicode.
===========================================


From: Roger Hondshoven <rhondshoven at yahoo.com>
Subject: LL-L "Orthography" 2008.12.17 (05) [E]

Hi Ron,



You wrote:



Personally, I don't much care what systems are used as long as they have at
least some consistency and internal integrity.



I do agree. I for myself, I'm definitely in favour of a phonemic spelling.
It's all very interesting to know that e.g. Dutch *pijl *and *peil*, which
today sound exactly the same, go back to 2 words with a different meaning
and a *different pronunciation* in the Middle Ages. The ordinary language
user does not derive any particular benefit from this knowledge. People who
do not agree will object that one and the same spelling for both words will
lead to misunderstanding, which, in my opinion, is complete nonsense. We
don't speak in single words. The meaning will become clear in the context of
a sentence. In 1946 the Spelling Commission for the Dutch language abolished
the distinction between e.ee and o/oo in open syllables as in *regen/deelen,
mogen/hooge.* But it failed, for obscure reasons, to do away with similar
distinctions between *rijk/reis, gauw/*gouw with homonynous diphthongs.



Regards,



Roger Hondshoven


----------

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

Thanks Roger. At least *one* person agrees with me. ;-)

When it comes to homophones, we don't get etymological clues in speech. Why
is it so important to get them in writing?

Regards,
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.

*********************************************************************
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20081224/b0bde858/attachment.htm>