LL-L "Language learning" 2008.05.17 (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 - 17 May 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: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2008.04.21 (04) [E]

Dear Lowlanders,

I was away for a week some time ago and before I went I marked some
threads for answering, but haven't had time to actually go back and
answer them until now. I hope you don't mind me thawing out some of this
again, and I hope the interest is still there!

> From: heatherrendall at tiscali.co.uk <heatherrendall at tiscali.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2008.04.20 (08) [E]
>
> Sandy wrote: So what do you mean by "traceable historical descent"?
> Isn't brought > bought traceable? If it persists then in the future it
> will also have
> the necessary historical descent? How old does it have to be before
> your
> "school of thought" finds it venerable enough to be right rather than
> wrong?
>
> Traceable history = back into the mists of time
>
> new development = we have evidence of this starting or finishing from
> a specific date onwards : since when it has become the norm
>
> Very different concepts and brought/bought comes under the second
> heading and - if so wanted by the people who speak that language, it
> may then become part of the language but as a "new development" But it
> will be traceable back to a misunderstadning / mishearing /
> misapplying    Bring/brought is historical      bring / bought is a
> new development
>
> Bring/brought   buy/bought  can be traced back  as can an uncertainity
> about certain verb patterns: it's nothing new that people aren't sure
> what they are hearing the most.

Heather,

What you seem to me to be saying is that a construct is wrong if we can
trace it back in such a way to demonstrate that it arose from
uncertainty. And if we can't, then we just have to accept it as we can't
prove its guilt. Is that right?

But you also seem to be taking a prescriptivist approach here, as if, if
we can show that something was based on ignorance, then we need to
correct our speech.

But I think modern speech has plenty of things that we can show were
based on ignorance by, for example, examining the development of the
language through it's literature.

For example, words like "whence", "hence", "thence" and "whither",
"hither", "thither" have all, in the past couple of hundred years, been
invaded and exterminated by "where", "here" and "there".

Do you therefore think that modern speech needs to be corrected with the
older words? Just because the modern versions seem fine to us doesn't
mean they wouldn't have the gentlemen of a couple of centuries ago
tearing their hair out in exasperation at the speaker's ignorance.

In other words, I don't think defining traceable history as "back into
the mists of time" does anything to explain why some forms of modern
speech are considered unacceptable to some people. You need a better
definition, a more accurate way of deciding when a thing has gone so far
that we have to start teaching the ignorant forms.

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/

----------

From: Sandy Fleming <sandy at scotstext.org>
Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2008.04.21 (04) [E]

Thanks, Ron, for your posting on language-learning.

You said:

"And, by the way, you don't need to be able to hear to study phonology
(or even phonetics) since we are talking about scientifically measurable
and visually describable values and patterns."

This is true, _but_ most modern books on language learning make
practically no effort to teach pronunciation.

I fondly remember the "Made Simple" series, where every sentence given
was written out in the IPA alphabet as well. As well as being a huge
boost to confidence in speaking, it showed very well how things like
liaison in French were actually said, something an analytical
description could never make up for.

Are there any language-learning series these days that describes
languages in terms of the IPA instead of "imitated pronunciation" (or
worse, a cassette tape or CD!).

Here's a question for dead language students... eh... dead-language
students...

When learning dead languages, how important do you consider
pronunciation to be? For example, Wright's Gothic gives two levels of
pronunciation, a straightforward one with mainly primary vowels, and a
more accurate one, some of which has been deduced by noting spelling
mistakes in the texts and assuming that if a writer consistently
confused letters then they must have had more similar aspects to their
pronunciation than we would think.

What would be the advantages to learning the "more accurate"
pronunciation (apart from sounding extra-mysterious when reciting the
Atta Unser to impress your friends :) ?

I assume that "more accurate" means exactly that: it's still not
accurate?

> From: Mike Morgan <mwmosaka at gmail.com>
> Subject: LL-L "Language learning" 2008.04.20 (08) [E]

> Well, one of the Level A (basics of basic) classes was asked to write
> sentences for each of a list of verbs on the board in the 3rd person,
> simple "present" tense. So it came to the verb "cook" and one student
> went to the board and wrote his sentence:
>
> "Every evening my mother ceek dinner."
>
> After about half a second I was rolling on the floor laughing --
> inside anyway. What a CLEVER student. He had internalized the system
> rule: BOTH 3rd person singular simple "present" tense of verbs and
> plurals of nouns are formed in the same way. So normally:
> Noun: kite > plural kites
> Verb: write > 3rd sing writes
>
> But then why not:
> Noun: tooth > plural teeth
> Verb: cook > 3rd sing ceek
> ?
>
> YES, it was a mistake, but, to MY mind, a VERY good one. Would that
> more students get it "wrong"!

Do you think this sort of thing is harmful and needs to be corrected
early, or would the normal course of learning and exposure sort it out?

Do students get to the point of making persistent language errors that
are difficult to sort out later if left unattended?

As a learner, is it OK for me to take a relaxed attitude to my errors,
safe in the knowledge that I can always correct them, or do I have to be
careful not to develop bad habits in the first place?

•

==============================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/20080517/2d75bca8/attachment.htm>