LL-L 'Language varieties' 2010.12.26. (03) [EN]

[Lowlands-L]

=====================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L - 26 December 2011 - Volume 03
lowlands.list at gmail.com - http://lowlands-l.net/
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Archive: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-08)
Language Codes: lowlands-l.net/codes.php
=====================================================


From: Sandy Fleming fleemin at live.co.uk
 Subject: LL-L 'Language varieties' 2010.12.25. (01) [EN]

> From: Pat Barrett pbarrett at cox.net
 > Subject: LL-L 'Language varieties' 2010.12.25. (01) [EN]

> p.s. I wrote "Scotsmen" with trepidation, also. Scottish folk would have
been safer but I've also heard Scotchmen. Any help there?

Pat, I don't mind, but if you mention it in front of anybody else, prepare
to be torn limb from limb by huge, ginger-bearded, claymore-wielding
Scotchmen and made into haggis. With Burns night coming up it's a
particularly dangerous time of the year.

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

>Thanks, Pat.

>It's important to bring in Scottish English at this point: a group of
English dialects with Scots substrata. Scottish English is *not* Scots,
however, or *vice versa* for that matter.

>Scots has its own grammatical rules and vocabulary. You will not be able
to follow much of Scots speech unless you are thoroughly exposed to it and
learn the vocabulary and idiom. Following Scottish English is another
matter (with the exception of some Scots loanwords); it's easy once you
have a grasp of the phonology.

I speak Scots and Scottish English as distinct languages, that's one point.
Even Southern English people who are used to my Scottish English can't make
out what I'm saying in Scots. The vocabulary, grammar and idiom are all
different, and while Scots phonology is similar to Scottish English, I
think there are some significant differences in terms of nasal and guttural
qualities.

Hopefully 2012 will be the year when I finally do these Wren recordings for
Ron  :)

Sandy Fleming
http://scotstext.org/

----------

From: "Steven Hanson" <ammurit at gmail.com>
 Subject: LL-L 'Language varieties' 2010.12.25. (01) [EN]

“I weigh in on these matters with trepidation since I don't command any
form of Lowlands except English (N.A. variety).

However, I've read of lot of linguistics over 50+ years and have always
read that linguists study dialects only and *a language is politically
defined*”


I think the part in bold is quite important.  I don’t know who the quote
comes from, but I tend to stick to the idea that “a language is just a
dialect with an army.”

----------

From: Isaac M. Davis isaacmacdonalddavis at gmail.com
Subject: "Lowlands List" <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>

Douglas Hinton wrote:

>    May I ask for the difference between a dialect and a language?  For me
> scots is a regional dialect, since the main difference between standard
> english and scots is pronunciation. I agree that scots  has a certain
> special vocabulary, but these same words are widely understood by the
> english speaker, even if not commonly used.
>   Rather extreme, but I even suggest that bokmaal norwegian and danish are
> the same language and that bokmaal is a regional dialect of danish. After
> all, written bokmaal can be read without hesitation by a native danish
> speaker. Most words are spelled the same as danish with the norwegian
> having some phonetic  spelling corrections. The accent, or pronounciation,
> is very different, but that's one characteristic of a dialect.
>    For me, a language needs it's own vocabulary and grammar rules. If it
> is 80 to 90% the same as the national language, differing mainly in
> pronunciation I would say it's  a dialect.
>

I think the definition of 'dialect' vs language is a tricky question and
quite political. A shprakh iz a diyalekt mit an armey un a flot, as the
saying goes. All language varieties are equally language varieties, and
much of the time, when one language variety is declared a dialect of
another, it's a statement of the privilege one variety (the 'language')
enjoys relative to the other (the 'dialect).

On the subject of Scots, whenever I have someone trying to tell me that
CLEARLY Scots is a dialect of English, I suspect that their exposure to
Scots, if they have any, is mainly a variety that I (borrowing from the
creolists) would call mesolect, even high mesolect. Basilectal Scots is
essentially incomprehensible to uninitiated English-speakers, including
ones who are very familiar with Scottish Standard English. Is it
phonologically different from English? Absolutely, and much of this
phonological difference is reflected in mesolectal and acrolectal varieties
spoken in Scotland, which you seem to be aware of. Is it lexically
different? Very much so, though of course it's under great influence from
SSE and other high-prestige varieties of English, so its lexicon is closer
and closer to English all the time. But basilectal Scots is really its own
beast, grammatically and morphologically, and to pretend that it's not is
to reveal one's ignorance of Scots as it is actually spoken.

Best,

Isaac

----------

From: Jan Neelen-Keppenne neelen.keppenne at skynet.be
Subject: LL-L 'Language varieties' 2010.12.25. (01) [EN]

Hello,

It's very simple:
A language has an army, a dialect has'nt.

Regards,

Jan Neelen

----------

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

Hi, all!

"אַ שפּראַך איז אַ דיאַלעקט מיט אַן אַרמיי און פֿלאָט."
(A shrakh iz a dialekt mit an armey un flot.)
"A language is a dialect with an army and a navy."

This is what several of you referred to. It has been attributed to the
Yiddishist linguist Max Weinreich, though apparently he quoted a member of
his audience in 1945.

In my opinion this is a case of gross simplification, and it certainly is
no longer true, if it ever was. No one in their right mind -- certainly no
serious linguists -- would regard Catalan as being a dialect (though
it *is*the national language of tiny Andorra), or would regard Frisian
to be
anything but a language (or rather a language group). Tatar, Bashkir,
Chuvash, Mari, Chukchi, Uyghur, Dai, Raeto-Romance, Faroese, Aramaic
(group), Aymara, Romany, and Tamazight are but a few examples of recognized
languages without the alleged attributes. Notwithstanding certain countries
refusing to recognize minority and regional languages, any clear-thinking
person would agree that for instance Sardinian, Corsican and Aromanian are
European languages in their own rights (never mind the official position of
Italy, France and Greece respectively).

Sandy:

Hopefully 2012 will be the year when I finally do these Wren recordings for
Ron  :)

That would be great.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

 =========================================================
Send posting submissions to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
Send commands (including "signoff lowlands-l") to
listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands.list at gmail.com
http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html.
http://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/group.php?gid=118916521473498
==========================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lowlands-l/attachments/20111226/60f77e2c/attachment.htm>