Newsgroups: sci.lang,k12.lang.deutsch-eng,soc.genealogy.benelux,soc.genealogy.german,alt.usage.german,soc.culture.german,soc.culture.belgium
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!purdue!haven.umd.edu!news.umbc.edu!eff!news.duke.edu!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!simtel!swidir.switch.ch!scsing.switch.ch!news.belwue.de!news.uni-ulm.de!rz.uni-karlsruhe.de!stepsun.uni-kl.de!uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de!readi
From: readi@uklira.informatik.uni-kl.de (RODERICVS READI)
Subject: Re: Lowlands language list
Message-ID: <1995Oct14.213201.18797@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de>
Sender: news@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de (Unix-News-System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: uklira.informatik.uni-kl.de
Organization: University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
References: <453ats$hso@kermit.informatik.uni-kiel.de> <1995Oct7.223613.19474@uklirb.informatik.uni-kl.de> <Pine.PTX.3.91j.951010092239.17929A-100000@carson.u.washington.edu>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 1995 21:32:01 GMT
Lines: 99

"R. F. Hahn" <rhahn@u.washington.edu> writes:
>On Sat, 7 Oct 1995, RODERICVS READI wrote:
 
>> This guy of Lowlands seem not to like germans, that seems to be
>> the reason that he insists that "low saxon" isn't a german dialect.
>
>That shows how much you know.  It seems to me that you have jumped to a
>conclusion without having the necessary knowledge, neither knowledge about
>"this guy" nor knowledge about the language and linguistic theory. 

	May be I have no knowledge in linguistic theory, but if you
	are a profesional linguist, then you have shown here how
	mediocre you are.

>Furthermore, it seems to me that your response is based on emotional
>reactions and subscription to a tradition of wishful thinking and dislike
>of diversity ("Ein Volk = eine Sprache"). 

	Your response isn't emotional at all, ist it?

>"This guy" *is* a German-born ethnic German and has never denied it, nor
>does he suffer from self-hatred.  So you are wrong there already.  I find
>it very unfair of you to dismiss me as some kind of German hater just
>because I dare to speak up for my paternal language and in the process say
>something with which you don't agree.  Defending the status and rights of
>a minority language does not automatically make me some evil secessionist. 

	I didn't say that you hate germans, I only said that it seems you
	don't like germans. Not to like someone is the same as hating?

>> As far as I know, there is no "low saxon", but a *low german dialect*
>> called "saxon", which purest representant is spoken in Niedersachsen.

[...]  The language is the direct descendant of Old Saxon and
>Middle/Medieval Saxon 

	And hence it is Low German.

and it's thus only indirectly related to German,[...]

	Haha! Jakob Grimm collected also low german stories, and they
	aren't less readable as other in high german dialects.

>though it is true that in the process of Germanization the language been
>strongly colored by German. 

	For God's sake, what an ignorant!
	Both languages influenced one another, one of the merits of Luther was 
	that he adapted some low german words to the schemes of high german.

The name "Low German" and it's variants came
>to be imposed with the imposition of German as a "high" language and the
>beginning of a tradition that relegated Low Saxon to the status of an
>undesirable linguistic tradition and created the myth of Low Saxon being
>nothing but a German group of dialects. 

	This is the understanding of an ignorant!
	
	The adjective "high" and "low" applied to "german" has mere 
	geografical connotation, there are also "midle german"
	dialects. People in territories in which low german
	is spoken begun to call the written language "high german"
	not because it is from the "high society", but because it is the
	dialect of the south.

>> In any case the border between language and dialect is not sharply
>> defined, a name may be used to denote a whole family of languages/
>> dialects. Political considerations may have influence in the selection
>> of the term. Low german *is* one of the old german dialects, as also
>> is the case with gotic.
>
>Again, this shows what you know.  Gothic on the one hand and German and
>Low Saxon on the other hand don't even belong to the same branch of the
>Germanic language group.  Gothic is Eastern Germanic, while German and Low
>Saxon belong to the Western Germanic branch. 

	Both, low german and high german are west german dialects,
	gothic, longobardic are east german dialects, there are
	also septentrional dialects.

>No, political considerations and wishful thinking do not override science,
>in this case linguistic facts.  

	Someone in de.etc.sprache.deutsch wrote that there is a difference
	between "Linguistik" and "Sprachwissenschaft", now I am beginning
	to understand this difference: the former consist only on agitation
	of the "lingua" ("lingua"= older "dingua" > "tongue" > "Zunge").

You can use any label you wish, but this
>doesn't change a separate language into a mere dialect of another
>language.  

If Low Saxon is a group of German dialects, then so are Dutch
>and Afrikaans, and Yiddish, [...]

	Indeed they are, the last is even a *high* german dialect.

	Rodrigo.

