Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Martin J. Dürst via Unicode]

On 2018/03/09 21:24, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote:

There are definitely many dialects across Switzerland. I think that for
*this* phrase it would be roughly the same for most of the population, with
minor differences (eg 'het' vs 'hät'). But a native speaker like Martin
would be able to say for sure.


Yes indeed. The differences would be in the vowels (not necessarily 
minor, but your mileage may vary), and the difficulty of this tongue 
twister is very much on the consonants.


Regards,   Martin.

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Martin J. Dürst via Unicode]

On 2018/03/10 20:26, philip chastney via Unicode wrote:


I would make the following observations on terminology in practice:



-- the newspapers in Zurich advertised courses in "Hoch Deutsch", for those who 
needed to deal with foreigners


This should probably be written 'the newspapers in Zurich advertised 
courses in "Hochdeutsch", for foreigners'. Hochdeutsch (Standard German) 
is the language used in school, and in writing, and while there may be 
some specialized courses for Swiss people who didn't do well throughout 
grade school and want to catch up, that's not what the advertisements 
are about.




-- in Luxemburg, the same language was referred to as Luxemburgish (or Letzeburgesch, 
which is Luxemburgish for "Luxemburgish ")
 (I forget what the Belgians called the language spoken in Ostbelgien)

-- I was assured by a Luxemburgish-speaking car mechanic, with a Swiss German 
speaking wife, that the two languages (dialects?) were practically identical, 
except for the names of some household items


I can't comment on this, because I don't remember to ever have listened 
to somebody speaking Letzeburgesch.



in short, there seems little point in making distinctions which cannot be 
precisely identified in practice

there appear to be significant differences between between High German and 
(what the natives call) Swiss German

there are far fewer significant differences between Swiss German and the other 
spoken Germanic languages found on the borders of Germany


In terms of linguistic analysis, that may be true. But virtually every 
native Swiss German speaker would draw a clear line between Swiss German 
(including the dialect(s) spoken in the upper Valais (Oberwallis), which 
are classified differently by linguists) and other varieties such as 
Swabian, Elsatian, Vorarlbergian, or even Letzeburgesch (which I have 
never seen classified as Allemannic)).


The reason for this is not so much basic linguistics, but much more a) 
vocabulary differences ranging from food to administrative terms, and b) 
the fact that people hear many different Swiss dialects on Swiss Radio 
and Television, while that's not the case for the dialects from outside 
the borders. So in practice, Swiss German can be delineated quite 
precisely, but more from a sociolinguistic and vocabulary perspective 
than from a purely evolutionary/historic linguistic perspective.


[Disclaimer: I'm not a linguist.]

Regards,   Martin.

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Asmus Freytag via Unicode]

  
  
OK folks - this kind of thing really
  should have been taken off-line,
  but when people start denying things that can be confirmed by
  looking at the mail archive, it's definitely time to close the
  topic. 
  
  A./
  
  
  On 3/12/2018 4:31 PM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:


  

  2018-03-12 21:28 GMT+01:00 Arthur
Reutenauer :
On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 02:58:32PM +0100,
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
>> should and shouldn’t be called: I don’t see the
phrase “French
>> Alemannic” catching on at all :-)
>
> I've not used that terminology.

    That’s true, you misspelt it as “French
  Allemanic”.



False, I've not used that _expression_ at all ! I only
  cited what you wrote, so there was no typo at all, except
  possibly by you (the citation above that you wrote
  yourself).
  

  



  

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

2018-03-12 21:28 GMT+01:00 Arthur Reutenauer <
arthur.reutena...@normalesup.org>:

> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 02:58:32PM +0100, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> >> should and shouldn’t be called: I don’t see the phrase “French
> >> Alemannic” catching on at all :-)
> >
> > I've not used that terminology.
>
>   That’s true, you misspelt it as “French Allemanic”.
>

False, I've not used that expression at all ! I only cited what you wrote,
so there was no typo at all, except possibly by you (the citation above
that you wrote yourself).

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

20  Incidentally, since you have very strong opinions on what things
>
> should and shouldn’t be called: I don’t see the phrase “French
> Alemannic” catching on at all :-)
>
I've not used that terminology. In France this is just called "alsacien"
(Alsatian in English) and descibed as one of the Alemannic
languages/dialects, and never German, nor Swiss, nor a combination of these
!

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

Apparently you just trust Wikipedia that uses old sources.

Very poopulated area does not mean it is populated by native speakers.
There were lots of migrants that never spoke anything than just standard
French or French slightly "creolized" with foreign languages (but these
adapations are also disappearing in younger generations of people born in
France from migrants). The "Francique" is not so popular, much less than
Alsatian (Alsace is very densily populated too) and Francique" is not the
same as Alsatian and doest not have the same mevel of protection by
cultural relation institututions (there's no national support at all only
regional initiatives or initiatives taken by municipalities to support
schools, and some museums or local universities with linguistic study
branches).

Apparently you've never been in France: regional languages have low levels
of support (lower than the support for English or Standard German or
Spanish in higher levels of education, or even Arabic, Latin and Hebrew,
sponsored by private educational institutiuons where a minimum "trunk" for
standard French is still mandatory for most domains).

I really doubt you can find 400,000 speakers of Francique in Lorraine,
except in a very narrow band near Luxembourg in rural areas in an aging
population. I've lived and worked in Nancy and Metz, and in fact almost
never heard any word in that language, only French and few reginal words.

On the opposite the Alsatian language (French Allemanic) is very vivid in
Alsace (including in Strasbourg), and not correlated with the Allemanic
languages of Switzerland and far enough from standard German to be
distinguished.
.

2018-03-10 20:33 GMT+01:00 Arthur Reutenauer <
arthur.reutena...@normalesup.org>:

> > The dialect of Lorraine with the  large number of speaker is not the one
> > you think about, yes it is a Romance/Oïl language and not Germanic at
> all.
>
>   You are not reading what I write, so you can’t know what I’m thinking.
>
> > The one you are refering to is only in a very small tiny part of Lorraine
> > and almost extinct.
>
>   Yes, and that’s the language Philip was talking about, reportedly
> called Plattdeutsch by French speakers.  What’s your source for “almost
> extinct”?  Ethnologue 20th ed. has 400,000 speakers (2013), even
> accounting for possible exaggerations that’s hardly extinct.  The “very
> small tiny part” where it’s spoken – 3,300km² according to The Dialects
> of Modern German (Charles Russ ed., Routledge 1990) – is very populous
> because of the former mining industry.
>
> > You are confusing it with the "parler lorrain" (as I said, "Lothringer
> > Platt", part of "Francique" is nearly extinct in Lorraine, this is not
> the
> > case of the "Parler lorrain", also known in Belgium as "Gaumais" and very
> > near from "Wallon").
>
>   You are condescending and your pseudo-erudition gets in the way of the
> conversation.  Nobody except you mentioned Romance dialects, you just
> drifted there on your own.
>
> Arthur
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

2018-03-10 19:02 GMT+01:00 Arthur Reutenauer <
arthur.reutena...@normalesup.org>:

> Philippe,
>
>   So many approximations and misinterpretations ...
>
> > Note that  this is what you heard in Lorraine, and there's some
> competition
> > between Lorraine and Alsace. If you lived in Alsace they absolutely don't
> > like to have their language named "German" or "Deutsch" or "platt
> Deutsch",
> > this is "alsacien" for them and nothing else
>
>   Condescending, are we?  This can of course be a delicate issue,
> especially if expressed insensitively, but most people are also able to
> recognise objective truths.  I never heard anyone deny that Alsatian was
> a dialect of German, except the totally misinformed.  There is even a
> good feeling of connection with the dialects beyond the border, in Baden
> in particular (not so much in Switzerland) -- and an acknowledgement
> that dialects become quite different further inland.
>
> >  even if people in Lorraine
> > (that use other regional oil languages, not based on the Germanic
> substrate
> > but on Romance substrate) refer to Alsatians as "platt deutsch" with even
> > more confusion as it actually mean "low German" and confusing with "nds"
> > spoken much further to the North (North-western Germany and Netherlands)
>
>   Where do I start?
>
>   1. That’s not what Philip said
>   2. There is a Germanic dialect in Lorraine, with a large number of
> speakers
>

The dialect of Lorraine with the  large number of speaker is not the one
you think about, yes it is a Romance/Oïl language and not Germanic at all.

The one you are refering to is only in a very small tiny part of Lorraine
and almost extinct.

  3. Platt just means dialect in German
>   4. Nobody is confusing Lothringer Platt with Low German, except perhaps
> you
>

You are confusing it with the "parler lorrain" (as I said, "Lothringer
Platt", part of "Francique" is nearly extinct in Lorraine, this is not the
case of the "Parler lorrain", also known in Belgium as "Gaumais" and very
near from "Wallon").


>   5. If you’re going to write “oïl languages” in English you could at
>  least put the diaeresis on the ‘i’, otherwise it really looks silly
>

Sorry, my message was posted in English, I had not realized that "Oil" with
the capital would look so silly without the diaeresis and in this context,
as if we were sepaking about olives or burnable energy.

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[philip chastney via Unicode]

it is not clear whether you are quoting from some agreed standard, quoting from 
some other authority, or constructing a classification of your own

whatever the classification, it should be descriptive, and it is best not to be 
too pedantic, because practice can vary from region to region, from individual 
to individual with the same region, and from context to context for an 
individual

I would make the following observations on terminology in practice:

-- the newspapers in Zurich advertised courses in "Schweizerdeutsch", meaning 
the contemporary spoken language

-- in Wengen (pronounced with a [w] not a [v]), I tried to explain to the man 
behind the counter that my ski binding needed fixing, using my best High German 
(with a Stuttgart accent, according to my tutor - he came from Hannover, so I 
don't think it was intended as a compliment)
with a muttered "momenta", the owner dived into the back of the shop, to 
fetch the technician, whose skills included conversation in High German  --  I 
told him my problem, he told me it wasn't worth fixing, and I said, "Oh, bugger"
at this point, they realised I was a Brit, and (at their request) we 
switched to English ("so much easier", the owner said)  --  for all 3 of us, 
High German was a foreign language

-- in Romansch-speaking St. Moritz, the hotels claim to be able to accomodate 
those who speak High German, as well as those who speak Swiss German (because 
the two languages are not always mutually intelligible)

-- the newspapers in Zurich advertised courses in "Hoch Deutsch", for those who 
needed to deal with foreigners

-- when I lived that way, the French-speaking population of Nancy referred to 
the language of their German-speaking compatriots as "platt deutsch" (the way 
they used the term, it did not extend any further east than Alsace)

-- in Luxemburg, the same language was referred to as Luxemburgish (or 
Letzeburgesch, which is Luxemburgish for "Luxemburgish ") 
(I forget what the Belgians called the language spoken in Ostbelgien)

-- I was assured by a Luxemburgish-speaking car mechanic, with a Swiss German 
speaking wife, that the two languages (dialects?) were practically identical, 
except for the names of some household items

in short, there seems little point in making distinctions which cannot be 
precisely identified in practice

there appear to be significant differences between between High German and 
(what the natives call) Swiss German

there are far fewer significant differences between Swiss German and the other 
spoken Germanic languages found on the borders of Germany

/phil


On Fri, 9/3/18, Philippe Verdy via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister
 To: "Mark Davis ☕️" <m...@macchiato.com>
 Cc: "Tom Gewecke" <t...@bluesky.org>, "unicode Unicode Discussion" 
<unicode@unicode.org>
 Date: Friday, 9 March, 2018, 2:52 PM
 
 In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code is 
not (and should not be) named "Swiss German" (as it is only for "gsw-CH", not 
for any other non-Swiss variants of Alemannic).

The addition of "High" is optional, unneeded in fact, as it does not remove any 
ambiguity, in Germany for "de-DE", or in Switzerland for "de-CH", or in Italian 
South Tyrol for "de-IT", or in Austria for "de-AT", or even for "Standard 
German" (de)
 
 Note also that Alsatian itself ("gsw-FR") is considered part of the "High 
German" branch of Germanic languages !
 "High German" refers to the group that includes Standard German and its 
national variants ("de", "de-DE",
 "de-CH", "de-AT", "de-CH", "de-IT") as well as the Alemannic group ( "gsw" , 
"gsw-FR", "gsw-CH"), possibly extended (this is discutable) to Schwäbish in 
Germany and Hungary.
 
 My opinion is that even the Swiss variants should be preferably named "Swiss 
Alemannic" collectively, and not
 "Swiss German" which causes constant confusion between "de-CH" and "gsw-CH".
 

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode]

> In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code

​Whether I object or not makes no​ difference.

Whether for good or for bad, the gsw code (clearly originally for
German-Swiss from the code letters) has been expanded beyond the borders of
Switzerland. There are also separate codes for Schwäbisch and
Waliserdütsch, so outside of Switzerland 'gsw' mainly extends to Elsassisch
(Alsace, ~0.5M speakers). So gsw-CH works to limit the scope to Switzerland
(~4.5M speakers).

> My opinion is that even the Swiss variants should be preferably named
"Swiss Alemannic" collectively...

That's clearly also not going to happen for the English term. Good luck
with the French equivalent...

Mark

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Philippe Verdy  wrote:

> In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code
> is not (and should not be) named "Swiss German" (as it is only for
> "gsw-CH", not for any other non-Swiss variants of Alemannic).
>
> The addition of "High" is optional, unneeded in fact, as it does not
> remove any ambiguity, in Germany for "de-DE", or in Switzerland for
> "de-CH", or in Italian South Tyrol for "de-IT", or in Austria for "de-AT",
> or even for "Standard German" (de)
>
> Note also that Alsatian itself ("gsw-FR") is considered part of the "High
> German" branch of Germanic languages !
>
> "High German" refers to the group that includes Standard German and its
> national variants ("de", "de-DE", "de-CH", "de-AT", "de-CH", "de-IT") as
> well as the Alemannic group ( "gsw" , "gsw-FR", "gsw-CH"), possibly extended
> (this is discutable) to Schwäbish in Germany and Hungary.
>
> My opinion is that even the Swiss variants should be preferably named
> "Swiss Alemannic" collectively, and not "Swiss German" which causes
> constant confusion between "de-CH" and "gsw-CH".
>
>
> 2018-03-09 15:11 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode 
> :
>
>> Yes, the right English names are "Swiss High German" for de-CH, and
>> "Swiss German" for gsw-CH.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Tom Gewecke via Unicode <
>> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode <
>>> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still
>>> incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is
>>> much like standard High German
>>>
>>> I think Swiss German is in fact the correct English name for the Swiss
>>> dialects, taken from the German Schweizerdeutsch.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code
is not (and should not be) named "Swiss German" (as it is only for
"gsw-CH", not for any other non-Swiss variants of Alemannic).

The addition of "High" is optional, unneeded in fact, as it does not remove
any ambiguity, in Germany for "de-DE", or in Switzerland for "de-CH", or in
Italian South Tyrol for "de-IT", or in Austria for "de-AT", or even for
"Standard German" (de)

Note also that Alsatian itself ("gsw-FR") is considered part of the "High
German" branch of Germanic languages !

"High German" refers to the group that includes Standard German and its
national variants ("de", "de-DE", "de-CH", "de-AT", "de-CH", "de-IT") as
well as the Alemannic group ( "gsw" , "gsw-FR", "gsw-CH"), possibly extended
(this is discutable) to Schwäbish in Germany and Hungary.

My opinion is that even the Swiss variants should be preferably named
"Swiss Alemannic" collectively, and not "Swiss German" which causes
constant confusion between "de-CH" and "gsw-CH".


2018-03-09 15:11 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode :

> Yes, the right English names are "Swiss High German" for de-CH, and "Swiss
> German" for gsw-CH.
>
> Mark
>
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Tom Gewecke via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>
>>
>> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode <
>> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still
>> incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is
>> much like standard High German
>>
>> I think Swiss German is in fact the correct English name for the Swiss
>> dialects, taken from the German Schweizerdeutsch.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German
>>
>
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode]

Yes, the right English names are "Swiss High German" for de-CH, and "Swiss
German" for gsw-CH.

Mark

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Tom Gewecke via Unicode  wrote:

>
> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> >
> > So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still
> incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is
> much like standard High German
>
> I think Swiss German is in fact the correct English name for the Swiss
> dialects, taken from the German Schweizerdeutsch.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

English Wikipedia is not a good reference for the name; the GSW wiki states
clearly another name and "Alemannic" is attested and correct for the family
of dialects.
"Schweizerdeutsch" is also wrong like "Swiss German" when it refers to
Alsatian (neither Swiss nor German for those speaking it): these
expressions only refer to "de-CH", not "gsw".

2018-03-09 14:40 GMT+01:00 Tom Gewecke via Unicode :

>
> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> >
> > So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still
> incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is
> much like standard High German
>
> I think Swiss German is in fact the correct English name for the Swiss
> dialects, taken from the German Schweizerdeutsch.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Tom Gewecke via Unicode]

> On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode  
> wrote:
> 
> So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still 
> incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is 
> much like standard High German

I think Swiss German is in fact the correct English name for the Swiss 
dialects, taken from the German Schweizerdeutsch.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still
incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is
much like standard High German, unifying with it on most aspects, with only
minor orthographic preferences such as capitalization rules or very few
Swiss-specific terms, but no alteration of the grammar and no specific
characters like in Alemanic dialects; the term "Swiss tongue" in the
context given by the video is obviously false).
Note tht Schwäbisch is way far from it. What looks more like the Swiss
dialects of Alemanic if French Alsatian, it is not "Swiss", and don't tell
Alsatians that this is "German" when there are clear differences with the
language on the other side of the Rhine River, and lot of differences with
Schwäbish (which is much more a distinct language than a dialect of
Alemannic or German). Same remark about Tyrol and Bavarian (they are
probably nearer from Schwäbish than Swiss or French Alemannic, or than
Standard High German; their difference with Schwäbish is almost like the
difference between Standard Dutch and Limburgish or West Flämisch; Standard
Dutch, Standard German, French/Swiss Alemanic, and Schwäbisch are enough
differentiated to be distinct languages). The term "Alemannic" is way too
large, but calling it "Swiss German" is also wrong (even if its ISO 639-3
code is "gsw", probably taken from this incorrect name).

2018-03-09 13:23 GMT+01:00 Otto Stolz via Unicode :

> 2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
> :
>
>> De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt.
>> literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late]
>> ordered.
>>
>
> Am 2018-03-09 um 12:52 schrieb Philippe Verdy via Unicode:
>
>> Is that just for Switzerland in one of the local dialectal variants ?
>>
>
> Basically the same in Central Swabian (I am from Stuttgart):
>   I måen, mir häbet s Spätzles-Bsteck z spät bstellt.
>   literally: I guess, we have ordered the noodle cutlery too late.
>
> And when my niece married a guy with the Polish surname Brzeczek
> and had asked for cutlery for their wedding present, guess what we
> have told them. ☺
>
> Otto
>
> Solution:
>   Zerst hemmer denkt, mir häbet für die Brzeczeks s Bsteck
>   z spät bstellt, aber nå håts doch no glangt.
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode]

There are definitely many dialects across Switzerland. I think that for
*this* phrase it would be roughly the same for most of the population, with
minor differences (eg 'het' vs 'hät'). But a native speaker like Martin
would be able to say for sure.

Mark

On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 12:52 PM, Philippe Verdy  wrote:

> Is that just for Switzerland in one of the local dialectal variants ? Or
> more generally Alemannic (also in Northeastern France, South Germany,
> Western Austria, Liechtenstein, Northern Italy).
>
> 2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode 
> :
>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg
>>
>> De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt.
>> literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late] ordered.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>
>

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Otto Stolz via Unicode]

2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode
:

De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt.
literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late]
ordered.


Am 2018-03-09 um 12:52 schrieb Philippe Verdy via Unicode:

Is that just for Switzerland in one of the local dialectal variants ?


Basically the same in Central Swabian (I am from Stuttgart):
  I måen, mir häbet s Spätzles-Bsteck z spät bstellt.
  literally: I guess, we have ordered the noodle cutlery too late.

And when my niece married a guy with the Polish surname Brzeczek
and had asked for cutlery for their wedding present, guess what we
have told them. ☺

Otto

Solution:
  Zerst hemmer denkt, mir häbet für die Brzeczeks s Bsteck
  z spät bstellt, aber nå håts doch no glangt.

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

Is that just for Switzerland in one of the local dialectal variants ? Or
more generally Alemannic (also in Northeastern France, South Germany,
Western Austria, Liechtenstein, Northern Italy).

2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode :

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg
>
> De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt.
> literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late] ordered.
>
> Mark
>