------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$4.98 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Q7_YsB/neXJAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. OT: German reputation
From: Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: OT: German reputation
From: azathoth500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. [Somewhat OT] RE: German reputation
From: Shaul Vardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: OT: German reputation
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: fortis vs lenis (was Re: German style orthography)
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: USAGE: Vowel recordings
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: OT: German reputation
From: Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: Conlanging with Dick and Jane
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: OT: German reputation
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: OT: German reputation
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: Reading old Greek (was: kudos (was: most looked-up words))
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: OT: German reputation
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14. Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
15. Re: German reputation
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
16. Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
17. Re: Reading old Greek (was: kudos (was: most looked-up words))
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
18. Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
19. Re: Another natlang info request: Faruli
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
20. LLL Weekly Update #23/2004
From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
21. Salut vous autre (was: Notice of Revocation...)
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
22. Re: OT: German reputation
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
23. Re: Conlanging with Dick and Jane
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
24. Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
25. Re: fortis vs lenis (was Re: German style orthography)
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:26 -0500
From: Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: OT: German reputation
Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the german language
is where you guys live. (Except Germany of course ;)) Judging from what
you find on some internet boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where
I saw this. Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite neutral when it
comes to judging languages.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:44:42 -0500
From: azathoth500 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
I didn't even know German had a reputation.
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:26 -0500, Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the german language
> is where you guys live. (Except Germany of course ;)) Judging from what
> you find on some internet boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where
> I saw this. Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
> Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite neutral when it
> comes to judging languages.
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:58:14 +0200
From: Shaul Vardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [Somewhat OT] RE: German reputation
Well, I live in Jerusalem, and as you can imagine German is a language
that arouses mixed emotions here. One story from right now (this
afternoon) on a leading Israeli website: Two representatives came from a
law enforcement agency responsible for finding and ultimately deporting
migrant laborers who do not hold work permits. This policy has been very
strongly criticized by many Israelis. Several people who wrote critical
questions to the representatives alluded covertly or overtly to the
Holocaust, and after the representatives wrote their closing comments,
one surfer wrote "Danke schoen" and another "Sieg Heil" [both in
slightly sloppy Hebrew transliterations]. Similarly, I've often heard
people critical of Israel's policies towards the Palestinians make
reference to German when they are criticizing positions they consider
racist (a typical comment is "if you said that in German, people would
recognize you for what you are).
That's my impression of the dominant mood here (I'm not expressing my
opinion - I learnt German as a school student in England, despite some
mild objections from my father, and have nothing at all against the
language).
Kabirr pax mix qytsut
[Grosse Frieden aus Jerusalem]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Constructed Languages List
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Yann Kiraly
> Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 6:39 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: OT: German reputation
>
>
> Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the
> german language is where you guys live. (Except Germany of
> course ;)) Judging from what you find on some internet
> boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where I saw this.
> Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
> Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite
> neutral when it comes to judging languages.
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:01:37 -0500
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
[This message is not in displayable format]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:24:32 -0500
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fortis vs lenis (was Re: German style orthography)
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:20:13 +0000, Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>FORTIS - consonant sound made with a relatively strong degree of muscular
>effort and breath force.
>LENIS - consonant sound made with relatively weak degree of muscular
>effort and breath force.
That's one use of the two terms. For what I know, phoneticians haven't been
able to verify this distinction, so we must consider it hypothetical.
I've also seen the terms fortis and lenis used for the whole bundle of
features that may constitute the opposition of p/t/k and b/d/g (e.g. voice,
aspiration, length). In certain languages, certain features prevail, but the
underlying opposition of fortis and lenis stays the same. This allows the
assumption that the same opposition underlies e.g. English stops and French
stops. Intuitively, I think this use of the terms is more useful, though for
what I know, it hasn't ever been verified either.
=============================================
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:39:50 +0100, Henrik Theiling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>...
>> I believe these terms are often used in the description of German
>> dialects.
>
>Right. I think at least some, if not many, local dialects have a
>fortis/lenis distinction but lack voicedness.
All southern German lack voicedness in stops and fricatives, not only in the
local dialects, but also in the local standard German. I happen to speak one
of those dialects that lacks aspiration as well, so I guess this dialect
would be one of the obvious candidates for the fortis/lenis distinction. To
me, however, it seems to be rather a length distinction, since I haven't
ever seen a plausible explanation what the distinction of fortis and lenis
articulation is.
>I don't know about
>Austrian, it is definitely different from the standard High German
>pronunciation, since speakers of High German usually perceive b/d/g
>for Austrian p/t/k. I have so far assumed that this is due to lack of
>aspiration in Austrian. I haven't had a chance to listen thoroughly
>enough to see whether there is a distinction between p and b in
>Austrian, and whether it is only fortis/lenis, or whether there is
>(also or exclusively) a voiceless/voiced distinction.
The Austrian samples for a confusion of b/d/g and p/t/k were all inital.
Therefore, I imagine it might be the same as in many Alemannic dialects that
lack the distinction initially, but realize it as a length distinction
between vowels or voiced sounds (practically only sonorants). (My dialect
has the length distinction also initially.)
>in front of r and l, distinction between p/t/k and b/d/g is not retained
>in many dialects. High German loses its aspiration here, too,
Not in the standard German I know. I don't have the pronunciation Duden, but
the Grammar Duden says (§ 59, p. 50 in the 1998 edition, and I've replaced
IPA by CXS): "Gut hörbar ist die Aspiration auch dann, wenn dem Plosiv ein
Sonorant folgt wie in [p_hlA:n] (Plan), [t_hR\o:n] (Thron)" (the aspiration
is also well audible when a plosive is followed by a sonorant as in plan,
throne). To me, it seems that the aspiration may be replaced by a de-voicing
of the sonorant, e.g. [pl_0A:n, tR\_0o:n]. I don't remember I ever heard
[plA:n, tR\o:n].
>> > I've even heard some people argue that voicing isn't the primary
>> > distinction in English (I can't remember what they were arguing
>> > was the primary distinction...),
>>
>> Possibly aspiration - I have seen English described this way.
>
>Hmm, primary way of distinction? I don't know. If any of the three
>differences between High German plosives (i.e., fortis/lenis,
>voicedness, aspiration) is missing, I think the phones start to be
>mistaken. So I doubt it is reasonable to promote one of the three
>distinctions to a primary one.
>
>But maybe it's done. If so, I'd like to hear arguments, why. :-)
To me, the primary distinction in standard German is clearly the aspiration.
All instances of p/t/k that are opposed to b/d/g have it (it doesn't occur
in initial /Sp, St/, but these cannot be opposed to /*Sb, *Sd/). Another
argument: There are pronunciations of standard German that clearly
distinguish p/t/k and b/d/g, even though they lack voiced stops, e.g. in
careful Swiss standard German as heard in the media.
For what I know, most cases of English p/t/k that are opposed to b/d/g have
aspiration, and only a few don't, e.g. finally in dialects where voiced
final sounds don't lengthen the preceding vowel. Are there English dialects
that don't distinguish final p/t/k from b/d/g at all?
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
j. 'mach' wust
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:30:20 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: USAGE: Vowel recordings
Tristan wrote:
(My general observation on your various interesting mp3s is that both you
and Adrian differ radically from good ole Midwestern Merkin. Perhaps if I
get a microphone for Xmas I'll be able to post something in January.)
> As for 'our', I think it's very much underlyingly /&o/ for me (using
> your notation), contrasted with 'hour' which is, I spose, /&o@/ [&:w6,
> &:u)-, [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's probably the diphthong ending in a low
> unrounded vowel
> that makes yours sound British, but I'm convinced it sounds like it
> starts on [a], at least, if not [A].
I've been pondering our vs. hour-- "hour" is always 2 syl. ['AU)(w)@r\].
"Our~ours" can be 2-syl and homophonous* in contrastive position, and also
in very careful (pedantic) speech-- as in:
"He took hours [to do s.t.]" vs. "[groan] He took _ours_" or (snide) "_Our_
house is much nicer." Pedantic: "Our theory proposes [blah blah]"
intonationally = "The theory proposes...."
========================
* There's a possibility "our~ours" is slightly shorter-- instrumental
analysis would be needed.
========================
However, probably close to 99% of the time, our~ours is a non-dipthongized
monosyllable [Ar\(z)] in all occurrences.
>
> For Joe's talk of my [E] being more like [e], I certainly agree that
> his is significantly lower, and I generally call mine [e]~/e/ anyway,
> following the normal representation of the AuE vowel. Particular
> American pronunciations have values of /E/ that sound more like /&/ >to my
> ears---I'm not sure what they use for that.
Well, [&] of course. (I'd probably say, some of your pronunciations of /&/
sound more like [E].) My personal feeling is that Australian tends to raise
all front vowels a notch or two (requiring a "raised" diacritic; it's not an
entire cell movement, i.e. not /E/ > [e]-- more like /E/ > [E-raised] or
even [e-lowered]; there's also more tension involved than in Amer. speech.
It might be interesting to hear the AuE series: seat, sit, sate, set, sat.
(Initial p/b/m work too) Mine: [sit sIt sejt sEt s&t]-- I think they match
the IPA cardinal vowels pretty closely (except the diphthongized /e/)
On an interview program this AM, I heard an Australian correspondent say
"it's what I write about"-- "I write" sounded very like Amer. "ah rot" [A
r\At].
Perhaps some industrious person could create a website where everyone could
post their vowel sounds??? Like "Yer Ugly Mug"**-- We might call it "My
vowel movements" :-))))))
=======================
** Is it still alive? I never put up a picture.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 12:43:35 -0500
From: Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
I think german has a bad reputation because I now a frensh family, whose
younger son, who was about to learn german at school, ran around the house
making weird grunts and calling it german. And what about the reputation of
being hard that finnish has? And actually, the germans (e.g. we) think the
frensh are funny because they leave out h's everywhere. That's how we
produce a frensh sounding german: leave out the h's. This looks like this:
Ich* ge'e in das aus, wo es frischen Ammelbraten und Interschinken gibt.
A nother example would be that the english speakers of the world turn all
the th's into s's when imitating germans. Get the picture?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 09:56:59 -0800
From: Gary Shannon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlanging with Dick and Jane
--- "Pascal A. Kramm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> Suppose one took a first
> >year reader like "Fun With Dick and Jane" or
> >"McGuffey's Eclectic Reader" and began on page one
> >with "See Spot run." and "The cat sees the mouse."
> and
> >translated the entire book, sentence by sentence,
> into
> >the new conlang, discovering vocabulary and
> >grammatical principles as they were needed.
>
> <snip rest>
>
> Good idea! :D
> The point is just - where to get this first year
> reader stuff from?
I've actually purchased a couple of antique children's
readers from the early 1900's on eBay and Amazon. I'm
waiting for them to arrive. They are all illustrated
and out of copyright so I'm hoping to be able to put
the illustrations and sentence on a web page in the
style of the original book.
<snip>
> Perhaps you could write down the sentences and make
> them avaiable for
> everyone? Then, if everybody started using them, we
> would have a much better
> chance of comparing the conlangs with each other
> than just the Babel text
> all the time.
>
I would be happy to put down these sentences. There
will probably be much repetition as these are designed
to drill beginning readers, but I can choose
representative sentences from each chapter and level
and perhaps build a collection of a handful of typical
first year sentences, a handful of second year ones,
and so on.
--gary
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:08:59 -0500
From: # 1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
[This message is not in displayable format]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:12:43 +0000
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
Yann Kiraly wrote:
>I think german has a bad reputation because I now a frensh family, whose
>younger son, who was about to learn german at school, ran around the house
>making weird grunts and calling it german. And what about the reputation of
>being hard that finnish has? And actually, the germans (e.g. we) think the
>frensh are funny because they leave out h's everywhere. That's how we
>produce a frensh sounding german: leave out the h's. This looks like this:
>Ich* ge'e in das aus, wo es frischen Ammelbraten und Interschinken gibt.
>A nother example would be that the english speakers of the world turn all
>the th's into s's when imitating germans. Get the picture?
>
>
>
>
But there is no [h] in 'gehe', is there? I've only heard it pronounced
[ge:@].
German generally has a reputation for sounding harsh in English-speaking
countries - as does any language, in general, which uses [x](eg.
Welsh). It's just that German is one of the better known ones.
Also, it's 'French' in English, though it is generally pronounced [fr\EnS].
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:18:41 +0000
From: Joe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Reading old Greek (was: kudos (was: most looked-up words))
Thomas Leigh wrote:
>Ray wrote:
>
>
>
>>>OTOH, I pronounce all Greek the same way
>>>as well -- with Modern Greek pronunciation.
>>>
>>>
>>So do I :)
>>
>>
>
>I spent a semester in Greece when I was 19, and I attended services at
>Greek Orthodox churches. When they read from the New Testament, they
>pronounce Koine as if it were Modern Greek. So I say, if it's good
>enough for the Greeks, then it's good enough for me! :)
>
>
I don't know much about Greek, but how intelligible are Modern,
Classical, and Biblical Greek to one another (when written, of course -
I know there have been phonetic changes). Would it be, for example, a
situation similar to Old vs. Modern English, Latin vs. Italian, or even
Old Norse vs. Icelandic?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:20:26 -0500
From: "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:39:26 -0500, Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the german language
>is where you guys live. (Except Germany of course ;)) Judging from what
>you find on some internet boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where
>I saw this. Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
>Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite neutral when it
>comes to judging languages.
In German speaking Switzerland, it has a bad reputation! Two reasons: The
Swiss German identity is eager for making a difference to the Germans, and
to most, standard German is the school language, associated with all the bad
feelings towards school. Many are ashamed that they speak Swiss standard
German and not standard German as in media from Germany and are jelous of
the better linguistic skills of Germans (many Swiss Germans hardly ever talk
standard German).
Actually, kids who aren't in school yet enjoy speaking the standard German
they've learned from the German media, and before the world wars, the public
use of standard German was common (since then, it's become more and more
unusual).
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
j. 'mach' wust
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:31:43 -0500
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:16:37AM -0500, # 1 wrote:
> I'm sorry...
>
> I never wanted to start such a discution
>
> About America, the word America Is the continent including North and
> South-America...
Except that's really two continents. (They may be physically connected
(or at least were pre-Panama-Canal), but that doesn't stop Europe and
Asia from being considered separately.) When someone wishes to refer to
both continents together, one usually says "The Americas", not
"America".
The word "America" by itself doesn't technically refer to anything; it
can only be an abbreviation of some longer name. Possible such longer
names include "North America", "South America", and "The United States
of America", of which the latter is the most common. This is really no
different from referring to The United States of Mexico as just
"Mexico", other than the fact that there isn't anything else
for it to be confused with.
While on the subject of the USA's southern neighbor: it is customary in
English to write its name without the accent mark over the E. This is
just a question of using the orthography of the surrounding language
rather than the source language. I also write "Greece" rather than
"Ελλας". Which is just the orthographic equivalent of saying
[,p_h&.r\Is'fr&nts] rather than [p&,Ri:'fRa~s], or [spei_^n] rather than
[e'spa.Ja], or, yes, [k_hw@'bEk] rather than [ke'bEk]. We also say that
Quebec is a "Canadian" province rather than a "Canadien" one (or
"Canadienne"; is "provence" masculine or feminine?), though I still
don't know where that |i| came from; it seems like it should be just
"Canadan".
-Marcos
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 18:53:34 +0000
From: Keith Gaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
Your Name wrote:
> Hmm... You know, when I was taught the continents, I could've sworn they
> told me seven: Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, South America,
> Australia and Antarctica. None of those are 'America', so I'm not sure
> where you're talking about. I check an English-language dictionary, and
> it gives the US as the primary definition of America. And I even look at
> which country I come from, and I think it's the only one where the
> conventional short-form is the same as the name of the continent it's
> on. As we've established, it isn't America.
America... that's a bit like Eurasia: a landmass made up of two
continents.
K.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 14:35:00 -0500
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: German reputation
----- Original Message -----
From: "Yann Kiraly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the german language
> is where you guys live. (Except Germany of course ;)) Judging from what
> you find on some internet boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where
> I saw this. Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
> Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite neutral when it
> comes to judging languages.
What an interesting question! Personally, I find German magnificent. What
a language! it is so rich in expressions, and it is so difficult to master.
Sir Richard Mulcaster, back in the sixteenth century, wrote an essay in
which he chided the English for thinking that their "owne tunge hath not
matter," i.e., their own language was of no account, as compared to the
French and to the GERMANS. Now that English has become more confident in
itself, and more widely spread, many English speakers including and
(especially Americans, though the Brits aren't entirely free of this
attitude) presume, quite arrogantly, that they needn't learn any foreign
languages. Among Americans, German is considered too harsh and difficult
for acquisition, and too inexpedient. The foreign language of preference
over here is Spanish. That's reasonable, as Spanish is nearly a second
language in this nation, and in comparison to French and German it is
extremely easy. I picked it because at thirteen I never thought I was going
to leave California. I took nine years of Spanish. Then I took French,
then I took German, then I took Welsh. And I'm in the process of teaching
myself Italian. Of these languages, German is the hardest for me (although
it cannot beat modern Irish Gaelic for difficulty of spelling and
structure). I've never produced so many reversals in any language than I
have in my attempts at German, my tongue getting totally tied in knots
(although I must admit that nothing compares to the embarrassing spoonerism
made to a Swiss policeman in Geneva--merci geau pou!--uttered in total
nervousness). But because I've studied German, I've come to respect the
constructions that seem so strange to an English speaker: such as the
parantheses within parantheses where infinitives stack up at the end. It
has a complexity of syntax that approaches Latin! whereas other western
languages have separated out their subordinate clauses. I was clearly
influenced by German in a lot of Teonaht construction. When I look back at
some of T's structures and words, I see German-ness poking out everywhere.
I copied the reversal of syntax in the relative and subordinate clauses. I
copied and modified the verbs with prepositions. Even my word garne, "to
like," obviously comes obliquely, I realize, from German "gern." But it's
also a monster of a language! Struggling through a phrase with a separable
verb can be a nightmare. Here is a sentence that I received in a
correspondence about filling out the right forms to get permission to cite:
"...lag unserer Postsendung vom 13 Juli 2004 ein Verpflichtungsschein bei,
der leider nicht zurückgeschickt wurde." Now of course I was indignant,
because the required form had never been sent along with the Postsendung vom
Juli, but what the heck was "lag"? The answer comes in "bei," after the
Verflichtungsschein. What authority! What ability for a bureaucrat to
humble a quivering professor! Probably one of the best (and the funniest)
testimonies to an American's indignation over the difficulties of German can
be found in Mark Twain's famous essay: "The Awful German Language." Here is
a link to it:
http://www.crossmyt.com/hc/linghebr/awfgrmlg.html#x1
I laughed my head off!
Nummer Eins writes:
>Why do you think a language has a reputation? You mean something like those
>who say it is hard to learn? Or those who make generalisations?
All languages have reputations among speakers of other languages. In
Geneva, where I lived for a while, British English was considered "sexy and
sophisticated." But not American English. Italian was cool, too, but not
German. And not parts of German-speaking Switzerland.
> When you say Germans are neutral to judge, do you say it because of the
> great experiment Germany had before the two World Wars in the studies of
> languages?
No, Yann meant that in his observations of his fellow Germans, that he
detected no real prejudices for or against other languages. Hence they were
"neutral." He might not be correct. I'd be interested to know whether the
Germans think Italian beautiful, and English not, or French artistic and
Russian not, or whatever. I seem to recall some sense of fun poked at
Bavarian and Swiss dialects. I know for a fact from my German friends that
they consider certain types of discourse within Germany to be proper,
improper, correct, or déclassé. What their opinion is of English I'd also
be interested to know.
Number One also asked:
don't understand what you mean by frensh or english sounding german.
Yann was talking about "accents," surely. When an Englishman or an American
speak German, they might pronounce it using an accent that favors phonemes
they are familiar with, such as pronouncing "welche" as /'vElS@/, not
noticing that "ch" is pulled to the alveolar palatal area of the mouth. You
can often detect a person's linguistic origins by the way they pronounce
your language. This is a fact that has been made great fun of for years in
burlesques, novels, cinema, and everyday jokes. Haven't you ever imitated
an American speaking French?
Tschüß!
Postscript: about spoonerisms: the merci go pooh was laughed at by my
American friends, who noted that it was not only a metathesis of /b/ and
/k/, but a metathesis of voiced and voiceless consonants. So that it came
out as an inadvertant insult which fortunately the kind policeman either
ignored or didn't understand. Ah, the pitfalls of foreign languages and
nations! and those who struggle in them! :) :)
Sally
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:50:54 -0600
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
Tristan wrote:
> > you'll never make me call them by the
> > word they stole to the whole continent
>
> Hmm... You know, when I was taught the continents, I could've sworn they
> told me seven: Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, South America,
> Australia and Antarctica. None of those are 'America', so I'm not sure
> where you're talking about.
Well, sometimes today, and historically, the two continents of the
New World were considered one single continent. The fact that they are
actually geologically more distinct than Europe is from Asia doesn't
change that fact. (The latter fact also goes to show how arbitrary such
naming conventions are, and why it is silly to get up-tight about it.)
Anyways, I thought the joke was pretty bland. The reason people in
the English-speaking world equate 'America' with 'the United States'
is because that convention far predates the separate existence of the
US. It was as a catch-all for the British colonies in the New World
and, the richest and most populous being those that later formed the US,
it was most frequently used in reference to them. Therefore, it is
indeed the British, at least as much as the Americans, who are to blame
for that. :)
Seriously though, the Americans of the time were *less* likely than Britain
to refer to America as a whole. The inhabitants of each colony saw
themselves as separate countries with no more connection to one another
than their common monarch, much like Canada and Australia. (There's an
excellent book about the colonists' experience and indentity in the Seven
Years' War _Crucible of War : The Seven Years' War and the Fate of
Empire in British North America, 1754-1766_. It tries to set the
background of the American Revolution in the context of this earlier war,
and examine how changing self-interest affected colonist's changing
attitudes to rule from London. All 912 pages are worth reading, I can
attest!)
==========================================================================
Thomas Wier "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 13:51:00 -0600
From: "Thomas R. Wier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Reading old Greek (was: kudos (was: most looked-up words))
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> That's my not quite so long experience too. I certainly have
> experienced that the reconstructed pronunciation of Swedes
> and Norwegians differs on some points, and those of Swedes
> and Germans are not easily mutually intelligible!
In my experience, Germans typically don't actually use a
reconstructed pronunciation at all. Rather, their native
way of pronouncing Latin is simply not as divergent from that
of antiquity as the traditional English pronunciation of
Latin, which underwent the Great Vowel Shift. In legislative
assemblies of the Anglophone world, one usually still adjourns
_sine die_ /saIni daI/. ;)
==========================================================================
Thomas Wier "I find it useful to meet my subjects personally,
Dept. of Linguistics because our secret police don't get it right
University of Chicago half the time." -- octogenarian Sheikh Zayed of
1010 E. 59th Street Abu Dhabi, to a French reporter.
Chicago, IL 60637
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:16:12 -0500
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
De rien, mon ami... you are completely excused for your agitation in this
matter of political spoofing.
Numéro Un? Une? homme? femme? You hide, so, behind this designation. I
couldn't even send you a private and very hilarious letter; you've set it up
such that your email address can't be read by my machine. I was going to send
you and Marcos a link to a completely irreverant site touching on Marcos'
recent, questionable, but uproarious posting which because my site was equally
questionable I didn't want to share with the list. Oh well. At any rate,
Number One (I find it too hard to type "# 1"--missed a few times even then),
you write below that you think we all should use accent marks for foreign words
like Quebec, but you don't bother to look up the correct spelling for
"written." I can, with difficulty, produce a diacritical mark over a letter in
Outlook Express, but the only one I have memorized is ß, Unicode 225. All the
others I have to check. Were I ever to write to you in French, I would check
every word for spelling, gender, correctness of idiom, an arduous and long
procedure, and if I were to make a mistake, I'm SURE you would be as forgiving
of me as all of us are of YOU. I realize you don't have the time to correspond
with us quickly and consult an English grammar at the same time... it would
take hours to respond to posts. So please don't take this the wrong way: but
if you want us to conform to your language and its spelling conventions, then
quid pro quo. Perhaps you and all of us had better stick to issues of language
construction, and leave the political spoofs and the spelling corrections
behind.
Please accept these remarks with our friendliest intentions to assist!
:)
Sally
----- Original Message -----
From: # 1
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 12:16 AM
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
I'm sorry...
I never wanted to start such a discution
About America, the word America Is the continent including North and
South-America...
About Quebec, I think a placea or names wich comes from another language
should be writen in that language (as much it has the same alphabet)
scuse me for that agitation...
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:26:34 -0500
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another natlang info request: Faruli
Okay, to those who were confused by this request, I misunderstood
my source. The actual language is Fulani, which, unlike Faruli,
seems to exist. Still not a lot of online resources, though, so
pointers still appreciated.
:)
On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 02:25:54PM -0500, Mark J. Reed wrote:
> Or maybe it's spelled "Farouli"? In any case, it's a West African
> language, and if I thought Amharic resources online were scant, well,
> there's a cornucopia of them compared to this. I'm hoping I'm just
> misspelling it completely and there's actually info out there; if
> anyone has any pointers, I'd appreciate it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> -Mark
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:02:35 +0100
From: Jörg Rhiemeier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: LLL Weekly Update #23/2004
Hallo!
Nothing to report this week.
Greetings,
Jörg.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 15:46:27 -0500
From: Sally Caves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Salut vous autre (was: Notice of Revocation...)
My apologies, # 1. I had to right-click on "# 1" in the "from" box and add it
to my address book. That's when your correct email address showed up. In most
cases, though, when I do a return, I see the full email address of the
recipient, and I usually cut and paste that into a private reply. In your
case, I couldn't do that. My mailer wouldn't recognize it, or it rerouted it
back to the list. Sorry if I thought you were setting it up this way
deliberately! :(
Sally
----- Original Message -----
From: Sally Caves
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 3:16 PM
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
Numéro Un? Une? homme? femme? You hide, so, behind this designation. I
couldn't even send you a private and very hilarious letter; you've set it up
such that your email address can't be read by my machine.
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:09:49 +0100
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: German reputation
Quoting Yann Kiraly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi! I've been wondering lately what the reputation of the german language
> is where you guys live. (Except Germany of course ;)) Judging from what
> you find on some internet boards, it can't be to good (don't ask me where
> I saw this. Multiple places I stumbled on accidentaly.). I live in
> Germany, and as far as I can see, the Germans are quite neutral when it
> comes to judging languages.
I suppose that the general perception here is that German is harsh-sounding.
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 16:22:37 -0500
From: Roger Mills <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Conlanging with Dick and Jane
Gary Shannon wrote:
>
> I would be happy to put down these sentences. There
> will probably be much repetition as these are designed
> to drill beginning readers, but I can choose
> representative sentences from each chapter and level
> and perhaps build a collection of a handful of typical
> first year sentences, a handful of second year ones,
> and so on.
>
Glad you mentioned that... Otherwise, I was thinking, it could take an
awfully long time to get from Dick and Jane up to the level of, say, a New
York Times editorial, not to mention Milton's prose, or Sir Thos.
Browne's............:-)))
Welcome back, by the way!!
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:24:16 +0100
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: FW: Notice of Revocation of Independence
Quoting "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, Dec 12, 2004 at 12:16:37AM -0500, # 1 wrote:
> > I'm sorry...
> >
> > I never wanted to start such a discution
> >
> > About America, the word America Is the continent including North and
> > South-America...
>
> Except that's really two continents. (They may be physically connected
> (or at least were pre-Panama-Canal), but that doesn't stop Europe and
> Asia from being considered separately.) When someone wishes to refer to
> both continents together, one usually says "The Americas", not
> "America".
Well, if your considering Asia and Europe to be two different continents, you're
operating on a definition so divorced from geological realities that no
non-arbitrary answer can be given to the question whether the Americas consist
of one continent or two.
As usual when this discussion pops up, I'll refer to the Swedish distinction
between _kontinent_ "geological continent" (eg, Eurasia) and _världsdel_
"traditional division of the Earth" (eg, Europe). Searching the archives for
either word should turn up several posts of mine on the subject. I really wish
you anglophones would suffer a similar attack of common sense on this point.
For the record, the most obnoxious country-name in the world is "The Central
African Republic".
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 22:37:58 +0100
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: fortis vs lenis (was Re: German style orthography)
Quoting "J. 'Mach' Wust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004 11:20:13 +0000, Ray Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >FORTIS - consonant sound made with a relatively strong degree of muscular
> >effort and breath force.
> >LENIS - consonant sound made with relatively weak degree of muscular
> >effort and breath force.
>
> That's one use of the two terms. For what I know, phoneticians haven't been
> able to verify this distinction, so we must consider it hypothetical.
Even if you doesn't believe in its phonemicity, surely you must be able to feel
different levels of muscular tension in your speech organs as well different
amounts of breath force?
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
