LL-L "Grammar" 2009.06.15 (04) [EN]

[Lowlands-L List]

===========================================
L O W L A N D S - L - 15 June 2009 - Volume 04
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
===========================================

From: Marcus Buck <list at marcusbuck.org>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2009.06.09 (01) [EN]

From: Marcus Buck <list at marcusbuck.org <mailto:list at marcusbuck.org>>

> I made some further investigations in Germanic morphology and found out,
> that all what I said was based on false presumptions ;-)
> There's no paradigm "imperative follows infinitive/first person". "ich
> fahre", "er fährt", imperative "fahre" shows, that German too doesn't apply
> a rule like that. Actually the rules depend on the Ablaut classes for
> Germanic verbs. Third person and imperative only coincide for the Ablaut
> classes III.b. (Old High German: infinitive 'werfan', 1st person 'wirfu'
> [1st person followed the same pattern as 2nd/3rd person in Old High German],
> imperative 'wirf' = Modern German: infinitive 'werfen', 3rd person 'wirft',
> imperative 'wirf'), IV. ('neman', 'nimu', 'nim' = 'nehmen', 'nimmt',
> 'nimm'), and V. ('geban', 'gibu', 'gib' = 'geben', 'gibt', 'gib').
> At least according to <http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oudsaksisch>
> corresponding forms existed in Old Saxon. The article mentions infinitive
> 'helpan', 1st person 'hilpu', imperative 'hilp' [Ablaut class III.b.]).
> Old Saxon short 'i' was sound-shifted to short 'e' in open syllables and in
> front of 'r' and 'l' later, so 'nimu', 'giƀu', 'wirpu', and 'hilpu' would
> all coincide with the infinitive after that sound shift. The 2nd and 3rd
> persons were formed with an 'i' in it (e.g. 'hilpis', 'hilpid') and where
> thus subject to Umlaut. So the 'i'->'e' sound shift didn't affect them and
> they stay different until today. Imperative forms 'wirp' and 'hilp' would
> have been subject to the 'i'->'e' sound shift too. But in closed syllables
> 'nim' and 'giƀ' would lead to 'nimm' and 'giff'. They would only lead to
> 'nehm' and 'geev' if the syllables would have been open. It's not
> impossible, that besides 'nim' and 'giƀ' based on dialect (most of our
> knowledge of Old Saxon is based on documents from the southern periphery and
> we know few about the northern dialects) there where different forms (e.g.
> 'nima' and 'giƀa'), that would explain the modern forms of 'nehm' and
> 'geev'. Another explanation would be, that the singular imperative forms
> were adjusted to the plural.
> And in the end we are where we were right at the start: Most likely it's a
> matter of dialect.
>
One more update: I just found a reference in H. Zahrenhusen: 'Lautstand der
Mundart von Horneburg', that in 1909 when Zahrenhusen wrote the book, in
Horneburg (which is southeast of Hamburg, about halfway between my home and
Hamburg), the imperative forms 'giff' and 'itt' could still be heard besides
the more widespread forms 'geev' un 'eet'. Personally I only know 'geev' and
'eet' from my dialect. But it seems, 'giff' and 'itt' are the original forms
and 'geev' and 'eet' are younger forms that were created by clearing effects
(but have gained widespread use cause they are easier to memorize).

That would mean, it's not German influence, but rather the opposite: A Low
Saxon innovation that was established although German backed the older
forms. Sounds much better to me than the "Low Saxon breaks under German
influence" story ;-)

Marcus Buck

----------

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

Thanks a lot, Marcus! This is really interesting.

Let me just add for the benefit of our friends everywhere that today's Low
Saxon imperative forms influenced those of Missingsch and Missingsch-derived
northern German dialects. ("Missingsch" is a German dialect with a strong
Low Saxon substratum.)  In such varieties you say "Ess!" instead of "iss!"
(eat!), "geb!" instead of "gib!" (give!), and so forth.

Sounds much better to me than the "Low Saxon breaks under German influence"
story ;-)

I agree.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron
Seattle, USA

•

==============================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/20090615/6fff8316/attachment.htm>