[Wikipedia-l] Request for creation of Dutch-Low Saxon (nds-nl)
Servien Ilaino
nl2b at europe.com
Sun Jun 26 17:13:19 UTC 2005
Hi,
Ja precies, helemaal mee eens Wouter! (Het enigste wat niet klopt is
"zij"; waarom denkt iedereen dat ik 'Servien' een vrouwennaam is haha!)
But anyway... if anyone would like to check out the differences please
see: http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hööftsiet and
http://nds.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruker:Servien/Heufdbladsyde, the same site
as the German-Low Saxon one, just in a different dialect and some changed
etc.
Regards,
Servien Ilaino (m.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wouter Steenbeek"
To: node.ue at gmail.com, wikipedia-l at wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Request for creation of Dutch-Low Saxon
(nds-nl)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 17:06:36 +0200
>
> > As I noted before, it is a dialect continuum.
> All of the continental West Germanic language variants form a
> dialect continuum, with the possible exception of the Frisian
> tongues.
> > Stellingwarfs and Middel-pommersch are surely not mutually
> > intelligible, but Grunnegers and Oostfreesk very well should be.
> Yes, so are Berlinic and High German. And East-Veluws and Dutch.
> But Grunnegers and Oostfreesk are not or barely mutually
> intelligible when written down, because of the different spellings.
>
> > You are foolishly dividing Platt by nations. This is illogical.
If we
> > had an Oostfreesk Wikipedia, Grunnegers-speakers would surely
> > understand it and vice-versa, even though Grunnegers is in the
> > Netherlands and Oostfreesk is mostly in Germany.
>
> "Foolishly"... Mr. I-owe-all-the-world's-languages'-wisdom.... May
> I point at the difference in spelling once more? And don't you
> think that the bulk of the Dutch Low-Saxon dialects share some
> features most German dialects don't?
> > The problem of dialect continuum is a very difficult one.
> Yes, so it can't be solved by one such disregarding message.
> > HOWEVER, given the community reaction to a request for a
Baseldytsch
> > Wikipedia, I think the same is logical for a request for a "Dutch
Low
> > Saxon" Wikipedia
> Is it? Is Servien requesting a Wikipedia for just one town, or
> region? No, she obviously realises that, though the speaking
> communities hardly link dialects on any higher level than their own
> region (they will never say they speak Low Saxon, but always either
> the dialect of their own village or region, Twents, Sallands,
> Drents etc.), we should group some of them together. This is very
> different from what the proposer of the Baseldytsch Wikipedia did:
> he simply said: "I have no affinity with the other Alemannic
> dialects, so I want to open one for my dialect only".
> > -- your language may be different to whatever degree
> > than what many people on X Wikipedia use, but there is no rule
> > forbidding its use. There is no rule against writing pages and
pages
> > and pages of content on nds.wiki in Stellingwarfs or Achterhooks.
When
> > I suggested doing this, I got a cold response that Dutch Low
Saxon and
> > German Low Saxon aren't mutually intelligible. Before whinging to
us
> > about that, can you at least actually try to use your dialect on
> > nds.wiki to prove to us that it really doesn't work?
> Some users of nds: made clear that they only use one spelling: the
> Sass one. Dutch Low Saxon dialects are /never/ written in German
> spellings, except with some German-initiated projects.
>
> > Mark
> >
> Imo, the combined facts of mutual confusion in both speach and
> spelling makes this idea a valuable one.
>
> Wouter
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Nooit ongewenste berichten ontvangen: gebruik MSN Messenger
> http://messenger.msn.nl/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> Wikipedia-l at Wikimedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
___________________________________________________________
Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com
http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
More information about the Wikipedia-l
mailing list