![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
As a native low german speaker (westphalia) under the age of fifty, living in England, I would like to add some comments to this discussion.
I still speak my mother tongue anytime I call my family or if I visit hy hometown on the dutch border. Within my family I speak low german with my parents, almost all my older relatives, and three of my younger siblings. But I speak high german with my two youngest siblings and most of the younger members of the local community. I only know of a handful of my peergroup that have opted for speaking low german with their children. So whilst I think the number of native low german speakers is still in the higher six digit numbers if not millions, it is sadly dwindling fast.
A few years ago I met the parents of a danish friend in London and whilst they spoke no english or german and I spoke no danish, we quickly established that we each spoke a version of low german and were thus able to communicate. Also, whilst in South Africa, I was able to understand some of the Africaans based on my low german. Infact, when our host uttered an exclamation, his pronounciation was absolutely identical to that of my mother.
One contributor spoke of local variations not existing anymore. I disagree. My mother and fathers families are from a town only a few miles down the road from my hometown. I vividly remember being asked 'where do you come from' when I started work. As if I was from another planet. Only because in my familie we say 'kerke' not 'karke' (spelling of my low german is total guess work... I never used it in any written form though people often make up low german poems for wedding invites etc..) These variations are still in place and people do recognise if someone is from a town further afield. I used to vary my own low german accent depending on whom I spoke to.
As you will have noticed, I have called it low german throughout. That is because it is the only phrase that has made any sense to my english audience when I have tried to explain that high german is not my mother tongue. I believe that this whole discussion is based on a (to some extent understandable) aversion of many dutch people to be thrown into one pot with anything german. Personally, I think that this is rather sad. As someone else said... we are very much one people. I feel that I have far more in common with the low german speakers on either side of the border than with the high german speakers of my regional capital for example. The people that home in on any devision are mostly the same that cause problems in any society. Mainly of a certain age and gender. Why? Why not celebrate the heritage we have in common?
Any dutch person speaking low german should feel no more german than a german person should feel indien due to speaking an indo-european language. If someone you know names their child with a name that has bad connotations for you... it really does not take that long before the name in your mind is connected to the child, not the person you knew previously under that name.
I am curious... are any of the other participants in this talk actually native low german/dutch speakers themselves? It did not seem to me from what people have posted. As such it confirms what I think holds true for many things. Those that are converted to something are far more zealous than those that grew up with it. Food for thought there.....
Amianna 20:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I have found all of the discussions on this page to be very interesting, and I have a personal observation of my own. The area where I live in Southern Illinois is predominantly German, and many of the elderly folks in the area speak both English and what they refer to as either Low German (if they're speaking English) or Niederdeutsch. Most of the people come from Westphalia or Hanover (I'm assuming the old Kingdom of Hanover, not specifically the city). Both of my paternal grandparents, as well as their siblings spoke the language. My maternal grandmother did not, as her stepmother was of English descent. My maternal grandfather, whose own paternal grandparents and one maternal grandparent came from the Netherlands, also spoke this same language. I guess the point of this little background story is that even though my grandfather's family (Huegen) came from the Netherlands, they still spoke the same Low German language as all of the German immigrants in this area.... so I'm not really buying the arguments stated at various points on this page that there is no "Low German" spoken in the Netherlands. Also, I have a question for anyone out there who may be able to answer it. In my area, the vowels with umlauts "oe", "ae", and "ue" are pronounced as a "long a" or "short e" for both "oe" and "ae", and as a "long e" or "short i" for "ue" (as in Huegen, which is pronounced Heeggen). Is this a typical Low German pronunciation or is it just an anglicized pronunciation? Derek J Schulte ( talk) 04:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
What are the sources for the claims that LG forms a dialect continuum with Dutch and High German? And I mean "sources", not "arguments." -- Pfold 00:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Pfold, will you accept this as a source? [1] Unoffensive text or character 16:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
@Pfold: I see you're a German speaker (and a language buff) yourself. I'm surprised you have such a hard time accepting that there is indeed a dialect continuum between High German - Low German - Frisian - Dutch (- Afrikaans, if you will). Listen to the languages; it's really quite obvious. Also, I'm guessing you have some reference books on Germanic languages yourself, judging by the articles you wrote... -- dllu 12:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Low German isn't spoken in The Netherlands, I don't know where this information comes from :S... in The Netherlands the language is called Low Saxon [Nedersaksisch = lit. Nethersaxic] (never Low German or Plattdeutsch/Platduits), this only refers to Low Saxon spoken in Germany. It sometimes is called "plat" but this really refers to any dialect spoken in The Netherlands. Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 13:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Judging by their language, it is possible to argue that people who speak Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch actually come from the same ethnic stock despite the fact that they are divided in national terms into Germans and Dutch (depending on which side of the border they live). Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch is very much an organic dialect - a mother tongue for the people who speak it - and the fact that it is spoken across a national border is not there due to some kind of colonial situation (example being the prevalence of the English language in Ireland).
Are the speakers of Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch (a 'multinational dialect') an example of the same ethnic stock divided by national lines similar to the speakers of a common shtokavian dialect in the former Yugoslavia (spoken by 85% of the Serbs, 70% of the Croats and all Bosniaks and Montenegrins)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.46.5.68 ( talk) 20:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
I have always been told that Low-German phrases and words were spoken in the West-Country of England (Somerset, Bristol) previously. I am told that my grandparents used such terms and that at least one of their parents were fluent. Some phrases such as 'How bist do' (How are you doing) still persist with some locally to me (Dorset), particularly of the pre-war generation. I would be interested to read what others think of this.
I've changed Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch into Mecklenburgisch-Vorpommersch because this is the right name of this dialect. For all of those who understand German look at this page [3]. There I wrote some more detailed info about that subject. If you need an Internet ressource have look at http://www.ins-bremen.de/. There you can find a brief history of Low German but also brief descriptions of those dialects that are spoken today. I didn't fix the link because I think first of all the article Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch must be renamed into Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch. Then we should do the link fixing. -- 89.53.11.120 15:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I know there are quite a few descendants of German emigrants living in South America, but does anybody know the sizes of these "communities"? Is it really fair to list Brazil and Uruguay (or the Netherlands, for that matter) as countries where Low German is spoken? You might as well say that German is spoken in England because there are tens of thousands of Germans living in London. -- dllu 12:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to request renaming 'Low German' to 'Low Saxon language', linguistically and politically it's more correct. 'Low German' in the Netherlands and Germany mostly refers to Low Saxon dialects spoken in Germany. Low German is, as mentioned, limited to Germany while it's spoken in countries from The Netherlands, Denmark, untill Poland and Ukraine. Also because the term 'Platdüütsch' was mentioned on the page, people will get the impression that is only about the German Low Saxon dialects, this is VERY confusing. Because of this confusing factor most interwiki links directing to this article are incorrect (some direct to West Low German, which isn't the main group Low Saxon, or they are not linked at all). Also the lable 'language' is missing, this is done in every other language article. I hope this can be solved a.s.a.p. Servien 12:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree, nevertheles let me correct some things. First of all: High Saxon exists. I don't know the proper name in English, in German it is called "Obersächsisch" which is merely spoken in Saxony today. A literal translation would be something like High Saxon. So "Niedersächsisch" (I'm just using the German terms to avoid any confusion) can be considered a certain counterpart to "Obersächsisch" if you refer to Low and High just like in High and Low German. However, Obersächsisch is in deed a High German dialect while Niedersächsisch is a dialect group of Low German. In Low German philology it is often called West Low German. East Low German doesn't belong to Low Saxon (Niedersächsisch). So your statement is a misinterpretation: In fact, if you read German, look up de:Niedersächsisch in the German Wiki and you will see that it is not used as a synonym for "Niederdeutsch" in German, but used to describe the Low German dialects spoken in the Netherlands. "Niedersächsisch" are those Low German dialects that are spoken mainly in the north western parts of Germany. The status of Nedersaksisch which is spoken in the Netherlands is somewhat complicated. Some linguists say these dialects belongs to Low German, others claim they are merely Dutch dialects today. The fact is, Low German is the internationally accepted linguistic term for this language. I can't say it any better. For those who don't believe that, have a look at English dictionaries such as the OED, Webster, or MED. You will only find the term Low German. I can also deliver another example: Oliver M. Traxel: Low German Loanwords in Middle English. A Comparison between the Electronic OED (Second Edition) and MED, in: Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 128 (2005), p. 41-62. -- 89.53.14.103 22:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
It says, "3. A non-specific term for any non-standard variety of German; this use is only found in Germany and is considered not to be linguistic."
This is also the way Harpo Marx uses it in his autobiography ("Harpo speaks"), Harpo's father was from Alsatia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.164.102.29 ( talk) 18:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The German word definitely has the same ambiguous or negative connotation as the Englisch "low".
As a matter of fact, I have been wondering about the explanation of the term at the beginning of this article: ""Low" refers to the flat sea coasts and plains of north Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, as opposed to High German and the mountainous areas of central and southern Germany". To tell the truth, this explanation sounds a bit euphemistic to me. Is there any evidence for this?
The idea that "High" German became the standard language particularly after Luther, the language spoken in church and in school, as opposed to the "Low" German spoken by the plain people, sounds more convincing to me. Low German definitely had this derogatory connotation for centuries, people feeling ashamed of not speaking High German when they had to visit some administrative office, for instance.
I don't mean to be a prophet on the chances that Low German may survive, but there has been a bit of a change during the past years (at least in East Frisia) towards a lot more Low German self-confidence. Agencies like the "Ostfriesische Landschaft" ( http://www.ostfriesischelandschaft.de/ol/index.jsp?id=6) try to promote the use of Low German in families, schools, and in legal and administrative documents. Anna ( talk) 22:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Also in English it used to be common to call South Germany "High Germany". I have never heard this in modern use, but at school I did learn an old song about "the cruel wars in High Germany", referring I suppose to the 30-years war. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 15:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The table is too wide at the moment, and with un-necessarily large font size. Can someone (who knows how to do this; I don't!) edit the table to constrain it to the page width, please - MPF 16:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Is it commonly agreed, that only subdivisions recognized by ISO should go into the infobox? Cause the subdivisions present now in the box have nothing to do with linguistics. ISO does not recognize based on linguistic evidence but based on "who asks gets it, if it's not made-up entirely". The more linguistics-based subdivisons are different. -- ::Slomox:: >< 19:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
at first I'm form the german wiki an my writen english is...problematic...so please can someone correct translate the topic? thanks.
'"Low" refers to the flat sea coasts and plains of north Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, as opposed to High German and the mountainous areas of central and southern Germany (including Alsatian spoken by most German-French residents of Alsace, France in addition to French), and the Alps (Switzerland and Austria).'
sorry, but no one in the south really can speak "High german" (my birthplace is in east germany, brandenburg/Havel, and i learned high german in the school). Bayern (never(!) translate a name) and Baden-Württemberger speak dialects auf South German/Upper German. Pfälzer, Rheinländer, Sachsen and other peoples of mid german federal states speak different dialects of central german. Thats a twice times important fact, 'cos you have great problems to understand a Bayer, if he speaks his dialect and you maybe have greater problems to understand a Sachse, when he speaks sächsisch... so please soeone correct that (when my englisch would be better, than ich would do that...but...yeah...you know) -- User:Shadak from Germany 16:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
The ionfobox lacks many dialects. how can they be added to the infobox ? Sarcelles ( talk) 16:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 17:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the difference between Niederdeutsch/Nederduits (Low German), Plattdeutsch/Platduits (synonyms?) and Niedersachsisch/Nedersaksisch (Low Saxon)? It's very confusing!
Low German/Plattdeutsch:
The articles Low German and West Low German don't actually tell you very well. Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 12:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 16:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
User:Undead warrior thinks my removal of the consonant table in the current revision constitutes vandalism. I suggest replacing the current table, which is simply a table of all the pulmonic consonants possible, with something similar to the one for Standard German. Munci ( talk) 23:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
This is getting stupid. Anyone who doesn't know that High German is the established term for all the German dialects that are not Low German shouldn't be editing this page. Any reader who is not familiar with the term can follow the wikilink - nothing else is required. If they're still puzzled, they can ask on this page. What they shouldn't be doing is deciding that it needs a source, because they think it "sounds like nonsense." In any case, there are no "standards documents" for this sort of established linguistic terminology. -- Pfold ( talk) 07:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Basic knowledge does not have to be verified every time it is referred to. Once on its own page is enough. I would define basic knowledge as things you can look up in a standard dictionary. So for example if you look up "High" in the Oxford English Dictionary (the regular pocket edition) you will find the definition "situated far above ground, sealevel, etc; upper, inland, as ... High German". -- Doric Loon ( talk) 09:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, since it is easier than arguing the point again and again, I have just included that OED definition as a footnote in the article, and also in two other related articles. Perhaps we can drop this now? -- Doric Loon ( talk) 13:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The OED has many definitions of "high". Why you chose that one is unclear. Unless there is a clear historical etymology, we must not present a hypothesis as a fact. So I've kept your contribution, but placed it in a context to make it clear that it veracity is in need of confirmation. Ogranut ( talk) 00:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
OK. If this url is a reliable one, then let's cite that as a reference (although a paper from a reputable academic linguist would be better). The best wikipedia articles do indeed have 20+ references. There's nothing wrong with that. The superscript + footnote format means that the refs don't interuppt the flow of the text, and it allows people to check the veracity of the material. An encyclopaedia article is for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the subject. Other people have no need to look at it. This is wikipedia policy so don't blame me for it! Also, I would point out to the clever so-and-so who put the OED definition of "high" as a ref, that he/she risks being blocked per WP:POINT. Ogranut ( talk) 04:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for those excellent references. On your last point, though, no it's not the same in English: we never use "High German" to mean the standard language, so there is no ambiguity for us: we only use it in its technical linguistic sense meaning "south German". Note also that the noun form "High Germany" used to be used in English to refer to the south, as in the old song:
-- Doric Loon ( talk) 21:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Guess I don't speak for the whole English language community then. OK, so both meanings exist in English too. But if you Google for High German and for Hochdeutsch and do some statistics on which meanings crop up more often, I think the pattern in English will be different from German, and will be mostly what I said before. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 22:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Low German or Low Saxon ... is any of the regional language varieties of the West Germanic languages.
Really? Including Swiss German and other High German dialects? Not to mention Frisian and English in all their various regional forms. And how do the Dutch feel about it? Could the editor responsible please change it to something meaningful and accurate; otherwise I shall remove it. Koro Neil ( talk) 06:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
In fact, I reverted to an earlier version. The original first sentence (restored here) was split into two, each in its own paragraph, probably because it was a tad unwieldy. However, the split was not carefully thought out, and resulted in the wildly inaccurate form I have cited here.
Koro Neil ( talk) 07:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
It seems that this paragraph only contains the pronunciation of a certain dialect. So some of the discriptions seem to be rather strange (at least to me), e. g. /ur/ is pronounced as in "hurry". I would never say it like that. The word "stur" (obstinate) is pronounced [stuːɘr]/[ʃtuːɘr] (/u/ as in tool), "Uröllern" 'great-grandparents' [uːɘrœlɘrn]. /or/ would be [oːɘr] (cf. Ohr, engl. ear), "Door" [doːɘr], engl. gate, /oo/ is pronounced [oː] or [ou]: Boot 'boat'. Most dialects use writing conventions of Standard German, cf. Klaus Groth:
/i/ is pronounced [ɪ] (ik, 'I'), [iː] (wi, 'we'), /e/ [ɛ] (Welt 'world'), [eː] (seten, 'sat') or [ə] (Jehann). There are lots of examples (/ee/ → [eː], cf. HG "Seele" 'soul', /ll/ short vowel: wull, cf. HG "wollen" etc.) Today, there are lots of writing systems, most of them contain pronciples that can be found in (Standard) German orthograpy, cf. Kellner, Birgit: Zwischen Anlehnung und Abgrenzung. Orthographische Vereinheitlichung als Problem im Niederdeutschen, Heidelberg 2002; Nerius, Dieter: Zur Funktion und Struktur der Schreibung des Niederdeutschen. In: Vulpius Adolatio. Festschrift für Hubertus Menke zum 60. Geburtstag. ed. by R. Peters, H. Pütz, U. Weber. Heidelberg 2001. p. 527–534. Maybe it should be mentioned what dialect is described in this section.-- 89.53.56.102 ( talk) 12:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
My german teacher in high school (who spent a good portion of his life in north germany) says that low saxon is basically just dutch dialects spoken in north germany. Is this true? To me, it seems much more like dutch than standard german. If it isn't just basically a dialect, is it more similar to and/or has a higher intelligibility with german or dutch? I mean would someone speaking low saxon more easily understand a high german or a dutchman?-- 143.236.168.14 ( talk) 23:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.236.168.14 ( talk) 23:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanx, that's exactly what I wanted to know--
143.236.168.14 (
talk)
18:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the number of German Links should be at least double the number of Dutch ones. It should reflect the number of speakers in the respective countries. Sarcelles ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
As a native low german speaker (westphalia) under the age of fifty, living in England, I would like to add some comments to this discussion.
I still speak my mother tongue anytime I call my family or if I visit hy hometown on the dutch border. Within my family I speak low german with my parents, almost all my older relatives, and three of my younger siblings. But I speak high german with my two youngest siblings and most of the younger members of the local community. I only know of a handful of my peergroup that have opted for speaking low german with their children. So whilst I think the number of native low german speakers is still in the higher six digit numbers if not millions, it is sadly dwindling fast.
A few years ago I met the parents of a danish friend in London and whilst they spoke no english or german and I spoke no danish, we quickly established that we each spoke a version of low german and were thus able to communicate. Also, whilst in South Africa, I was able to understand some of the Africaans based on my low german. Infact, when our host uttered an exclamation, his pronounciation was absolutely identical to that of my mother.
One contributor spoke of local variations not existing anymore. I disagree. My mother and fathers families are from a town only a few miles down the road from my hometown. I vividly remember being asked 'where do you come from' when I started work. As if I was from another planet. Only because in my familie we say 'kerke' not 'karke' (spelling of my low german is total guess work... I never used it in any written form though people often make up low german poems for wedding invites etc..) These variations are still in place and people do recognise if someone is from a town further afield. I used to vary my own low german accent depending on whom I spoke to.
As you will have noticed, I have called it low german throughout. That is because it is the only phrase that has made any sense to my english audience when I have tried to explain that high german is not my mother tongue. I believe that this whole discussion is based on a (to some extent understandable) aversion of many dutch people to be thrown into one pot with anything german. Personally, I think that this is rather sad. As someone else said... we are very much one people. I feel that I have far more in common with the low german speakers on either side of the border than with the high german speakers of my regional capital for example. The people that home in on any devision are mostly the same that cause problems in any society. Mainly of a certain age and gender. Why? Why not celebrate the heritage we have in common?
Any dutch person speaking low german should feel no more german than a german person should feel indien due to speaking an indo-european language. If someone you know names their child with a name that has bad connotations for you... it really does not take that long before the name in your mind is connected to the child, not the person you knew previously under that name.
I am curious... are any of the other participants in this talk actually native low german/dutch speakers themselves? It did not seem to me from what people have posted. As such it confirms what I think holds true for many things. Those that are converted to something are far more zealous than those that grew up with it. Food for thought there.....
Amianna 20:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I have found all of the discussions on this page to be very interesting, and I have a personal observation of my own. The area where I live in Southern Illinois is predominantly German, and many of the elderly folks in the area speak both English and what they refer to as either Low German (if they're speaking English) or Niederdeutsch. Most of the people come from Westphalia or Hanover (I'm assuming the old Kingdom of Hanover, not specifically the city). Both of my paternal grandparents, as well as their siblings spoke the language. My maternal grandmother did not, as her stepmother was of English descent. My maternal grandfather, whose own paternal grandparents and one maternal grandparent came from the Netherlands, also spoke this same language. I guess the point of this little background story is that even though my grandfather's family (Huegen) came from the Netherlands, they still spoke the same Low German language as all of the German immigrants in this area.... so I'm not really buying the arguments stated at various points on this page that there is no "Low German" spoken in the Netherlands. Also, I have a question for anyone out there who may be able to answer it. In my area, the vowels with umlauts "oe", "ae", and "ue" are pronounced as a "long a" or "short e" for both "oe" and "ae", and as a "long e" or "short i" for "ue" (as in Huegen, which is pronounced Heeggen). Is this a typical Low German pronunciation or is it just an anglicized pronunciation? Derek J Schulte ( talk) 04:34, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
What are the sources for the claims that LG forms a dialect continuum with Dutch and High German? And I mean "sources", not "arguments." -- Pfold 00:13, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Pfold, will you accept this as a source? [1] Unoffensive text or character 16:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
@Pfold: I see you're a German speaker (and a language buff) yourself. I'm surprised you have such a hard time accepting that there is indeed a dialect continuum between High German - Low German - Frisian - Dutch (- Afrikaans, if you will). Listen to the languages; it's really quite obvious. Also, I'm guessing you have some reference books on Germanic languages yourself, judging by the articles you wrote... -- dllu 12:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Low German isn't spoken in The Netherlands, I don't know where this information comes from :S... in The Netherlands the language is called Low Saxon [Nedersaksisch = lit. Nethersaxic] (never Low German or Plattdeutsch/Platduits), this only refers to Low Saxon spoken in Germany. It sometimes is called "plat" but this really refers to any dialect spoken in The Netherlands. Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 13:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Judging by their language, it is possible to argue that people who speak Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch actually come from the same ethnic stock despite the fact that they are divided in national terms into Germans and Dutch (depending on which side of the border they live). Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch is very much an organic dialect - a mother tongue for the people who speak it - and the fact that it is spoken across a national border is not there due to some kind of colonial situation (example being the prevalence of the English language in Ireland).
Are the speakers of Niederdeutsch/Nedersaksisch (a 'multinational dialect') an example of the same ethnic stock divided by national lines similar to the speakers of a common shtokavian dialect in the former Yugoslavia (spoken by 85% of the Serbs, 70% of the Croats and all Bosniaks and Montenegrins)? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.46.5.68 ( talk) 20:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
I have always been told that Low-German phrases and words were spoken in the West-Country of England (Somerset, Bristol) previously. I am told that my grandparents used such terms and that at least one of their parents were fluent. Some phrases such as 'How bist do' (How are you doing) still persist with some locally to me (Dorset), particularly of the pre-war generation. I would be interested to read what others think of this.
I've changed Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch into Mecklenburgisch-Vorpommersch because this is the right name of this dialect. For all of those who understand German look at this page [3]. There I wrote some more detailed info about that subject. If you need an Internet ressource have look at http://www.ins-bremen.de/. There you can find a brief history of Low German but also brief descriptions of those dialects that are spoken today. I didn't fix the link because I think first of all the article Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch must be renamed into Mecklenburgisch-Pommersch. Then we should do the link fixing. -- 89.53.11.120 15:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I know there are quite a few descendants of German emigrants living in South America, but does anybody know the sizes of these "communities"? Is it really fair to list Brazil and Uruguay (or the Netherlands, for that matter) as countries where Low German is spoken? You might as well say that German is spoken in England because there are tens of thousands of Germans living in London. -- dllu 12:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to request renaming 'Low German' to 'Low Saxon language', linguistically and politically it's more correct. 'Low German' in the Netherlands and Germany mostly refers to Low Saxon dialects spoken in Germany. Low German is, as mentioned, limited to Germany while it's spoken in countries from The Netherlands, Denmark, untill Poland and Ukraine. Also because the term 'Platdüütsch' was mentioned on the page, people will get the impression that is only about the German Low Saxon dialects, this is VERY confusing. Because of this confusing factor most interwiki links directing to this article are incorrect (some direct to West Low German, which isn't the main group Low Saxon, or they are not linked at all). Also the lable 'language' is missing, this is done in every other language article. I hope this can be solved a.s.a.p. Servien 12:18, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I agree, nevertheles let me correct some things. First of all: High Saxon exists. I don't know the proper name in English, in German it is called "Obersächsisch" which is merely spoken in Saxony today. A literal translation would be something like High Saxon. So "Niedersächsisch" (I'm just using the German terms to avoid any confusion) can be considered a certain counterpart to "Obersächsisch" if you refer to Low and High just like in High and Low German. However, Obersächsisch is in deed a High German dialect while Niedersächsisch is a dialect group of Low German. In Low German philology it is often called West Low German. East Low German doesn't belong to Low Saxon (Niedersächsisch). So your statement is a misinterpretation: In fact, if you read German, look up de:Niedersächsisch in the German Wiki and you will see that it is not used as a synonym for "Niederdeutsch" in German, but used to describe the Low German dialects spoken in the Netherlands. "Niedersächsisch" are those Low German dialects that are spoken mainly in the north western parts of Germany. The status of Nedersaksisch which is spoken in the Netherlands is somewhat complicated. Some linguists say these dialects belongs to Low German, others claim they are merely Dutch dialects today. The fact is, Low German is the internationally accepted linguistic term for this language. I can't say it any better. For those who don't believe that, have a look at English dictionaries such as the OED, Webster, or MED. You will only find the term Low German. I can also deliver another example: Oliver M. Traxel: Low German Loanwords in Middle English. A Comparison between the Electronic OED (Second Edition) and MED, in: Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 128 (2005), p. 41-62. -- 89.53.14.103 22:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
It says, "3. A non-specific term for any non-standard variety of German; this use is only found in Germany and is considered not to be linguistic."
This is also the way Harpo Marx uses it in his autobiography ("Harpo speaks"), Harpo's father was from Alsatia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.164.102.29 ( talk) 18:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
The German word definitely has the same ambiguous or negative connotation as the Englisch "low".
As a matter of fact, I have been wondering about the explanation of the term at the beginning of this article: ""Low" refers to the flat sea coasts and plains of north Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, as opposed to High German and the mountainous areas of central and southern Germany". To tell the truth, this explanation sounds a bit euphemistic to me. Is there any evidence for this?
The idea that "High" German became the standard language particularly after Luther, the language spoken in church and in school, as opposed to the "Low" German spoken by the plain people, sounds more convincing to me. Low German definitely had this derogatory connotation for centuries, people feeling ashamed of not speaking High German when they had to visit some administrative office, for instance.
I don't mean to be a prophet on the chances that Low German may survive, but there has been a bit of a change during the past years (at least in East Frisia) towards a lot more Low German self-confidence. Agencies like the "Ostfriesische Landschaft" ( http://www.ostfriesischelandschaft.de/ol/index.jsp?id=6) try to promote the use of Low German in families, schools, and in legal and administrative documents. Anna ( talk) 22:15, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
Also in English it used to be common to call South Germany "High Germany". I have never heard this in modern use, but at school I did learn an old song about "the cruel wars in High Germany", referring I suppose to the 30-years war. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 15:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
The table is too wide at the moment, and with un-necessarily large font size. Can someone (who knows how to do this; I don't!) edit the table to constrain it to the page width, please - MPF 16:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Is it commonly agreed, that only subdivisions recognized by ISO should go into the infobox? Cause the subdivisions present now in the box have nothing to do with linguistics. ISO does not recognize based on linguistic evidence but based on "who asks gets it, if it's not made-up entirely". The more linguistics-based subdivisons are different. -- ::Slomox:: >< 19:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
at first I'm form the german wiki an my writen english is...problematic...so please can someone correct translate the topic? thanks.
'"Low" refers to the flat sea coasts and plains of north Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, as opposed to High German and the mountainous areas of central and southern Germany (including Alsatian spoken by most German-French residents of Alsace, France in addition to French), and the Alps (Switzerland and Austria).'
sorry, but no one in the south really can speak "High german" (my birthplace is in east germany, brandenburg/Havel, and i learned high german in the school). Bayern (never(!) translate a name) and Baden-Württemberger speak dialects auf South German/Upper German. Pfälzer, Rheinländer, Sachsen and other peoples of mid german federal states speak different dialects of central german. Thats a twice times important fact, 'cos you have great problems to understand a Bayer, if he speaks his dialect and you maybe have greater problems to understand a Sachse, when he speaks sächsisch... so please soeone correct that (when my englisch would be better, than ich would do that...but...yeah...you know) -- User:Shadak from Germany 16:00, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
The ionfobox lacks many dialects. how can they be added to the infobox ? Sarcelles ( talk) 16:13, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 17:57, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
What is the difference between Niederdeutsch/Nederduits (Low German), Plattdeutsch/Platduits (synonyms?) and Niedersachsisch/Nedersaksisch (Low Saxon)? It's very confusing!
Low German/Plattdeutsch:
The articles Low German and West Low German don't actually tell you very well. Sεrvιεи | T@lk page 12:41, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Sarcelles ( talk) 16:18, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
User:Undead warrior thinks my removal of the consonant table in the current revision constitutes vandalism. I suggest replacing the current table, which is simply a table of all the pulmonic consonants possible, with something similar to the one for Standard German. Munci ( talk) 23:43, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
This is getting stupid. Anyone who doesn't know that High German is the established term for all the German dialects that are not Low German shouldn't be editing this page. Any reader who is not familiar with the term can follow the wikilink - nothing else is required. If they're still puzzled, they can ask on this page. What they shouldn't be doing is deciding that it needs a source, because they think it "sounds like nonsense." In any case, there are no "standards documents" for this sort of established linguistic terminology. -- Pfold ( talk) 07:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Basic knowledge does not have to be verified every time it is referred to. Once on its own page is enough. I would define basic knowledge as things you can look up in a standard dictionary. So for example if you look up "High" in the Oxford English Dictionary (the regular pocket edition) you will find the definition "situated far above ground, sealevel, etc; upper, inland, as ... High German". -- Doric Loon ( talk) 09:35, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Actually, since it is easier than arguing the point again and again, I have just included that OED definition as a footnote in the article, and also in two other related articles. Perhaps we can drop this now? -- Doric Loon ( talk) 13:01, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
The OED has many definitions of "high". Why you chose that one is unclear. Unless there is a clear historical etymology, we must not present a hypothesis as a fact. So I've kept your contribution, but placed it in a context to make it clear that it veracity is in need of confirmation. Ogranut ( talk) 00:37, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
OK. If this url is a reliable one, then let's cite that as a reference (although a paper from a reputable academic linguist would be better). The best wikipedia articles do indeed have 20+ references. There's nothing wrong with that. The superscript + footnote format means that the refs don't interuppt the flow of the text, and it allows people to check the veracity of the material. An encyclopaedia article is for the benefit of people unfamiliar with the subject. Other people have no need to look at it. This is wikipedia policy so don't blame me for it! Also, I would point out to the clever so-and-so who put the OED definition of "high" as a ref, that he/she risks being blocked per WP:POINT. Ogranut ( talk) 04:47, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for those excellent references. On your last point, though, no it's not the same in English: we never use "High German" to mean the standard language, so there is no ambiguity for us: we only use it in its technical linguistic sense meaning "south German". Note also that the noun form "High Germany" used to be used in English to refer to the south, as in the old song:
-- Doric Loon ( talk) 21:03, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
Guess I don't speak for the whole English language community then. OK, so both meanings exist in English too. But if you Google for High German and for Hochdeutsch and do some statistics on which meanings crop up more often, I think the pattern in English will be different from German, and will be mostly what I said before. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 22:51, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Low German or Low Saxon ... is any of the regional language varieties of the West Germanic languages.
Really? Including Swiss German and other High German dialects? Not to mention Frisian and English in all their various regional forms. And how do the Dutch feel about it? Could the editor responsible please change it to something meaningful and accurate; otherwise I shall remove it. Koro Neil ( talk) 06:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
In fact, I reverted to an earlier version. The original first sentence (restored here) was split into two, each in its own paragraph, probably because it was a tad unwieldy. However, the split was not carefully thought out, and resulted in the wildly inaccurate form I have cited here.
Koro Neil ( talk) 07:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
It seems that this paragraph only contains the pronunciation of a certain dialect. So some of the discriptions seem to be rather strange (at least to me), e. g. /ur/ is pronounced as in "hurry". I would never say it like that. The word "stur" (obstinate) is pronounced [stuːɘr]/[ʃtuːɘr] (/u/ as in tool), "Uröllern" 'great-grandparents' [uːɘrœlɘrn]. /or/ would be [oːɘr] (cf. Ohr, engl. ear), "Door" [doːɘr], engl. gate, /oo/ is pronounced [oː] or [ou]: Boot 'boat'. Most dialects use writing conventions of Standard German, cf. Klaus Groth:
/i/ is pronounced [ɪ] (ik, 'I'), [iː] (wi, 'we'), /e/ [ɛ] (Welt 'world'), [eː] (seten, 'sat') or [ə] (Jehann). There are lots of examples (/ee/ → [eː], cf. HG "Seele" 'soul', /ll/ short vowel: wull, cf. HG "wollen" etc.) Today, there are lots of writing systems, most of them contain pronciples that can be found in (Standard) German orthograpy, cf. Kellner, Birgit: Zwischen Anlehnung und Abgrenzung. Orthographische Vereinheitlichung als Problem im Niederdeutschen, Heidelberg 2002; Nerius, Dieter: Zur Funktion und Struktur der Schreibung des Niederdeutschen. In: Vulpius Adolatio. Festschrift für Hubertus Menke zum 60. Geburtstag. ed. by R. Peters, H. Pütz, U. Weber. Heidelberg 2001. p. 527–534. Maybe it should be mentioned what dialect is described in this section.-- 89.53.56.102 ( talk) 12:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
My german teacher in high school (who spent a good portion of his life in north germany) says that low saxon is basically just dutch dialects spoken in north germany. Is this true? To me, it seems much more like dutch than standard german. If it isn't just basically a dialect, is it more similar to and/or has a higher intelligibility with german or dutch? I mean would someone speaking low saxon more easily understand a high german or a dutchman?-- 143.236.168.14 ( talk) 23:04, 23 October 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.236.168.14 ( talk) 23:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanx, that's exactly what I wanted to know--
143.236.168.14 (
talk)
18:26, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
I suggest that the number of German Links should be at least double the number of Dutch ones. It should reflect the number of speakers in the respective countries. Sarcelles ( talk) 17:22, 13 November 2008 (UTC)