Jump to content

Talk:Low Saxon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How many dialects are being spoken by the angels dancing on the head of a pin, by which I mean ...

[edit]

The difference between Low and High German was illustrated for me as such: in High German, you have a tissue for your nose; in Low German, you have a snotrag.

I have no idea how these are correctly spelled, but something like High "tassenteuch" vs. Low "schneppeldorf". firepink

I've never heard that before, but that's funny!

As well as being a very precise linguistic criterion... ^^
One of the phenomena that happen for non-prestigious minority languages across the board is that their usage is increasingly severely restricted to specific domains. This includes not just increasing restriction to private domestic verbal communication in small rural communities, but also a greater restriction to humorous usage, whether in humorous sketches on stage or on the radio, the sharing of jokes and puns, or the creation of lists of vulgar expressions. The latter are then incorrectly perceived as being typical of the language in question to a much greater extent than vulgarity can feature in any given language. By the way, tissue (handkerchief) in Dutch Low Saxon is büüsdook (pocket cloth). Ni'jluuseger (talk) 13:29, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two small things: First, Low German is a dialect or group of dialects, not a language. Second, is the reference to Low German as the lingua franca of the Baltic region correct? I find that hard -- but not impossible -- to believe. Just checking that it wasn't a typing error. :-) If it is true, where can I learn more about how Low German spread so far afield? GreenPen

Of course Low German is a language. Why do you differ e.g. Belorussian and Russian? The difference between them might be as small as between Low German and German.
Are Russian and Belarusan even that far apart? High German is no more closely related to Low Saxon than it is to Dutch. (By a forgiving definition, of course, these are all the same language; by a strict definition, they are all groups of several different languages.) -- Toby 17:50 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)
Low Saxon is even more closely related to Frisian, English and probably Dutch than it is to High German -- User:JanTäufer 14:58 Mar 24, 2003 (UTC)
Concerning sound shifts?
Why is there a link to create an Occitan Wikipedia, a Moldovan Wikipedia, a Frisian Wikipedia and many other - dialects or languages?? Why isn't there a link to create Wikipedia in Low Saxon? If you click there you only reach nupedia.com.
Why in terms of cause and effect? Probably because Occitan is a well-known invented language, Moldovan has a country, and Frisian has speakers active in Wikipedia -- any of these is likely to get you a link. Why in terms of justification? None. If you want a Low Saxon link, then find out the official language code and bring to Intlwiki-L. There's no reason that Low Saxon couldn't have a Wikipedia. -- Toby 00:08 Feb 5, 2003 (UTC)
And where did you get the idea that Occitan is an "invented" language, Toby? It's directly descended from the Langue d'Oc that was spoken in southern France in the Middle Ages, and if anything, if one doesn't consider it a single language, it's because one considers it to be a language group, incorporating dialects/languages/whatever like Gascon and Provençal. It's not spoken by that many people today, but it was the primary language of southern France prior to the French Revolution, and it was still significantly spoken in many areas into the 20th century. Also, notably, it is quite close to Catalan (which has far more speakers than it today), to the extent that one could theoretically consider Catalan to be simply a divergent sort of it, were one to use a very broad definition of what "Occitan" is. -- Travis 2:48, 2 June 2005 (CDT)

Low German has been the lingua franca in this region because the city of Lubeck was the most important member of the hanseatic league in these days. People there used to speak Lübsch, the local version of Low German. For many Baltic cities used to maintain close trade contacts to Lubeck, traders there were able to speak Lübsch. http://www.sassisch.net/rhahn/low-saxon/index-engl.htm http://www.sassisch.net/rhahn/low-saxon/po-engl.htm http://www.einst.ee/publications/language/history.html

It is my understanding that Low German was spoken by the peasant class, and that High German would have been spoken by the upper classes. The distinction 'low' vs 'high' is based on the class of people that spoke the language. This info comes from the elder people in my community, which was settled by immigrants from northern Netherlands & surrounding parts of Germany. This provides an explanation why there are multiple dialects that are called Low German and High German.

"Low" and "High" refer to the relative elevation of the traditional regions the languages are from: Low German is from the North, which is at or near sea level, while High German (originally!) came from farther south, which is much more mountainous. This is what I have always heard. -Branddobbe 07:04, Jun 10, 2004 (UTC)

According to this article (and de:Niedersächsische Sprache, which it was based on), Hamburger is a Northern Low Saxon dialect. Northern Low Saxon language implies otherwise. Is it? -- Toby 18:30 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Hello! When does Wikipedia start a version in Low Saxon? -- Horst

The article on Low German states that initial /k/ /p/ /t/ developed to /h/ /pf/ /ts/ in High German and were conserved in Low German. Can you provide examples for all three sounds? I am not sure, but I think that Engl. heart -- Dutch hart -- German Herz come all from */k-/.
Besides, it is hard to give a clear distinction between language and dialect; so, rather don't take an all-too-strict strict position. -- dnjansen 21:39 6 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I'm not sure about the /k/ to /h/... I've heard it developed to /kx/ in some dialects, but stayed /k/ in others. Examples: koek vs. Kuche (no /k/ to /h/ shift), paard vs. Pferd, tot vs. zu. Also you should note that those shifts were only when the sounds occured at the beginning of a word. They changed to other sounds in other positions. Benji man 21:40, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC) P.S.: All non-German examples given are Dutch.

Plattdüütsch => Low Saxon and East Low German

[edit]

There is the major problem that Plattdüütsch is not only the name for the northern german slang but for some eastern german and ancient polish slangs as well. Anyone a good hint on how to resolve that other than by having three distinct WikiPedia articles for each of those three terms in all WP versions? -- Alexander.stohr 05:09, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Why has the interlanguage link been changed to "Platdüütsch"? The language calls itself "Plattdüütsch", with two ts; follow the link and you'll see that. -Branddobbe 17:44, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

Could you include the amount of speakers?--Arjuna 18:04, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

By which I mean ...

[edit]

By which I mean, the fact that Low German was a group of dialects does not mean that it was not a language, a similar case to that of modern day Norwegian. Robert Greer (talk) 01:02, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oldenburgisch

[edit]

As far as I know, 'Oldenburgisch' (this is the High German name for it, as I do neither know a Plattdüütsch nor an English one) is a dialect of Northern (Standard) Low Saxon just like Bremisch or Hamburgisch. Can anyone here confirm that? I must confess, I am from Butjadingen, which is in exactly that region, and still do not know that. (My parents did not teach me the language when I was a child. Today I'm sorry for that, earlier I did not care :-(.) Besserwissi 17:34, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Again Low Saxon vs. Plattdüütsch

[edit]

After moving the former Low German languages to Low Germanic languages, I've sorted out the links to that page. Since most links did not refer to that group of languages, but rather to the specifically German varieties, I've changed these links to Plattdüütsch. However, I've also noted that Plattdüütsch doesn't figure in any of the language trees on Wikipedia even though this page, the East Low German page and the Plattdüütsch page all agree that Plattdüütsch embraces both Low Saxon and East Low German.

Furthermore, none of these articles describes what distinguishes the different branches of the Low Germanic languages. It would be a real improvement if someone could mention the distinctive features between the Low Franconian languages and Plattdüütsch in general, and more specifically the differences between East Low German and Low Saxon. -- j. 'mach' wust | ✑ 13:00, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've consulted the Metzler Lexikon Sprache (ISBN 3-476-01519-X) and the site of the Institut für niederdeutsche Sprache. Both sources agree that the subdivision is as follows:
Currently, this article does not fit neatly in this categorization:
Judging from its content, this article can mainly be identified with the Westniederdeutsch from the above sources. However, based on the above sources, the name West Low German seems to be more appropiate, especially in order to match with the article East Low German.
However, this article–especially in the first paragraphs–also contains certain information that belongs not to Westniederdeutsch, but rather to all of Niederdeutsch (recognition by Germany according to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages) or even to the entire group of Low Germanic languages (any of a variety of [...] dialects spoken in [...] the Netherlands).
Neither source includes any dialects from the Netherlands, such as stated also in Westplatt. Please provide sources for the inclusion of dialects from the Netherlands! -- j. 'mach' wust | ✑ 12:23, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
de:Niederdeutsche_Sprache#Gliederung_des_Niederdeutschen (includes a source) and nl:Overleg:Nedersaksisch#Oost-Nederduits both cast doubts on the division East Low German versus West Low German. Sarcelles (talk) 20:03, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]

See Talk:Low Germanic languages#Requested moves. ― j. 'mach' wust | ⚖ 15:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

West Low Saxon

[edit]

Should this really link hence and not rather to Westneddersassisch ? Sarcelles (talk) 15:47, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]


10,000,000 speakers? ??

[edit]

I have lived in various regions of Niedersachsen for over 20 years and have yet to meet a single person who can speak Niedersächsisch. From what source is the number taken? Isomorphismus (talk) 00:24, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You've met them; they've just always spoken High German to you. One of the phenomena that happen for non-prestigious minority languages across the board is that their usage is increasingly severely restricted to specific domains. This includes increasing restriction to private domestic verbal communication in small rural communities. If you're not part of a small cluster of Saxon speakers in such a setting (typically older persons who've known each other all their life), Saxon speakers will almost always speak the national language to you, because they themselves have been steeped all their life in the notion that their language is inferior and vulgar, and should not be shared or passed on, let alone taught. That said, you probably don't spend much time in the countryside. Ni'jluuseger (talk) 13:36, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 January 2022

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

West Low German → Low Saxon – much more popular in the sources, see ngram. Heanor (talk) 16:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC) — Relisted. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:27, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of these things that go by many names. I'd agree with a change to Low Saxon, for the stated reasons, but I'm also content with the current situation where Low Saxon redirects to West Low German, and the alternative name is given right in the intro. LandLing 21:10, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. This is also the primary name given on German Wikipedia. Bermicourt (talk) 08:45, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 1 July 2023

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus that the current title is the WP:COMMONNAME. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:32, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Low Saxon → West Low German.

  1. "ngram" above is no argument, as ngrams is misleading:
    1. "Low Saxon" also occurs in terms like "Northern Low Saxon" or "North Low Saxon", and ngrams can't distinguish that.
    2. Low Saxon is an ambiguous term, at least meaning: (a) the complete Low German language and (b) West Low German (including e.g. Westphalian and Northern Low Saxon). ngrams can't distinguish that too.
      (In English, meaning (a) probably is more common than (b).)
  2. Low Saxon is an ambigious term, see above. West Low German is less ambigious.
  3. With "West Low German" and "East Low German" there is a conceptual pair, and an easy distinction (regionally, west vs. east). With "Low Saxon" this is lost.
  4. "Low Saxon" can be associated with Lower Saxony (the Bundesland Niedersachsen), but West Low German is also spoken in Bremen, Schleswig-Holstein, Westphalia. So the term can cause wrong associations, and be impolite towards West Low German speakers who aren't from Lower Saxony. 2003:DE:3702:B26D:F9DF:183D:B1D5:2BEF (talk) 09:02, 1 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. WPscatter t/c 19:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support (needs more discussion) based primarily on point 2 (that Low Saxon is also a prominent name for Low German). Indeed, the ISO code for Low German is nds, where the s stands for Saxon.
    (As to point 1.1, Ngram can show those phrases. Northern Low Saxon occurs zero times on Ngrams, which incidentally makes that a poorly titled article (it should be "North," and I assume that change would be non-controversial). North Low Saxon is about a tenth of the Low Saxon results. And Dutch Low Saxon is a little less. Here is a Google Ngram search with those added, plus [noun] Low Saxon and [adjective] Low Saxon as a whole.)
    However, I would like some more discussion first from people who are familiar with this subject. SilverLocust 💬 22:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More ngrams: [1] and [2]. I believe this shows that point 1.1 is moot. :3 F4U (they/it) 04:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Netherlands has been notified of this discussion. SilverLocust 💬 23:46, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProject Languages has been notified of this discussion. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. As far as I can tell, "Low German" is German terminology, whereas "Low Saxon" is the terminology chosen by non-German writers. This is reflected by the various ngrams. Low German doesn't really have much traction in the English language. As this is the English Wikipedia, I think we should stick to English majority terminology. LandLing 02:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Both terms are used in German and mean the same thing, but Low Saxon is the WP:COMMONNAME in both languages. Argument 1 fails because ngram can distinguish the various types of Low German or Low Saxon by using the asterisk feature. This shows that Low Saxon is way more common that "West Low German" which doesn't even register. Argument 2 is weak because, although even in German "Low Saxon" is used in different ways by different authors, this is the most common definition (see that article). Argument 3 fails because we go from the sources, not from conceptual neatness which does not really exist e.g. North Low German is part of West Low German aka Low Saxon. Argument 4 is not cited and appears to be made up - Wikipedia aims to reflect reality regardless of whether or not it offends some group or another. Let's stay with the most common title.Bermicourt (talk) 08:39, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

There are many more native speakers than 300.000

[edit]

The number of 300.000 native speakers must refer to a single subvariety. On the German Wikipedia it says: Das Institut für niederdeutsche Sprache nannte 2,6 Millionen Sprecher oder 14 Prozent (2009) der Bevölkerung in Norddeutschland, die „gut oder sehr gut Platt“ sprechen. That value is for Germany alone, so surely, 15 years later, we still have over 2 million native speakers and even more if we include the Netherlands.. Such incorrect low speaker numbers can downplay the value of the language and can delay things such as the language being added to Google Translate! Hunsrik and Limburgish are on there already - this language can be part of the next batch and giving machine translation builders the right demographic data to work with can really help with that! Tom9358 (talk) 06:21, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Low_Saxon&oldid=1231604183"