Print

Print


That's not dissimilar to the debate over how to make Niedersassisch/Plattdeutsch a written language. 
My personal opinion is that it should be left to the readers and writers of the language.

(It is a language shared between two nations, after all: the Lower Saxony state (and others) of Germany 
and the northernmost province of the Netherlands. The German orthography/ies tend to reflect the 
official German language while the Netherlands orthography tends to reflect the official Dutch 
language.)

Just my 0.02c worth.

Wesley Parish

Quoting BPJ <[log in to unmask]>:

> Although not a revived language an interesting counterexample is the
> current efforts to make Romani a written language. There is wide
> agreement
> not to seek a single standard but to treat the 'tribal' and 'national'
> dialect diversity as a closely related language family, which in any
> case
> is closer to reality. The only exception to this seems to be that some
> advocate an ASCII clean orthography in order to make
> international/online
> communication easier, so that you can use any Latin-alphabet keyboard.
> E.g.
> _sh_ is used by some in preference to _š, sz, sj_ etc. even in
> countries
> where /ʃ/ is written differently in the national language. Predictably
> there is controversy over how to distinguishing /tʃ/ and /tʃʰ/;
> apparently
> the to me obvious _c_ vs. _ch_ ain't so to everyone!
> Den 30 aug 2014 14:56 skrev "R A Brown" <[log in to unmask]>:
> 
> > On 30/08/2014 11:42, Jeff Daniel Rollin-Jones wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed on all points, Ray.
> >>
> >> There's also a dispute as to whether Ivrit is really a
> >> Semitic language like Ancient Hebrew, or some sort of
> >> relexified Yiddish. Personally, given the verbs I'd go
> >> for the former!
> >>
> >
> > From what I know, it is basically Semitic but, of course,
> > centuries of living in and around Europe and speaking
> > Yiddish or Ladino will have left its mark - particularly as
> > regards pronunciation.
> >
> > It will be interesting to see whether this new, unified
> >> revived Cornish will gain traction in the face of the
> >> onslaught from English;
> >>
> >
> > It will never replace English, of course; but it could live
> > along side it. I have heard the view expressed that the
> > competing forms of revived Cornish helped the language in
> > that it promoted interest. Personally I'm skeptical. I
> > rather think it probably put off more - people want to know
> > if the version they are learning is the 'correct' one or
> > will they have to relearn it at some time in the future. If
> > (nearly) all can agree on a standard form it must surely help.
> >
> > its my personal opinion that the AFAIK, so-far unique
> >> example of the revival of Hebrew was in no small part due
> >> to it happening in the sweet spot between the decline of
> >> French as an international language and the meteoric rise
> >> of English.
> >>
> >
> > Perhaps - but I cannot imagine the new state of Israel in
> > 1948 would have wanted to adopt either French or English as
> > its national language. It could, of course, have adopted
> > Yiddish or Ladino - but either choice would have been
> > divisive. The only viable options were either to adopt
> > Arabic or to adopt the already revived Hebrew. Both are in
> > fact official languages in Israel.
> >
> > Indeed, at one point whilst I was aware that Israel as a
> >> country had been "revived" I was under the impression
> >> that the native language of modern Israelis was English!
> >>
> >
> > A left over from the British mandate of Palestine, I guess,
> > as well as English being the ipso_facto global auxlang.
> >
> > --
> > Ray
> > ==================================
> > http://www.carolandray.plus.com
> > ==================================
> > "Ein Kopf, der auf seine eigene Kosten denkt,
> > wird immer Eingriffe in die Sprache thun."
> > [J.G. Hamann, 1760]
> > "A mind that thinks at its own expense
> > will always interfere with language".
> >
>