Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [folkspraak] Re: One needs an impersonal pronoun.

Expand Messages
  • David Parke
    ... I think Old English used wer for man a lot of the time. Preserved in werewolf , wergeld . Related by way of Proto-Indoeuropean to Latin vir as in
    Message 1 of 25 , Mar 7, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      tungol65 wrote:

      >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >>How should we do this in FS?
      >>
      >>Formal English uses "one", as in "One should not eat poison", when
      >>addressing everybody, but nobody in particular. Informal English
      >>normally uses "you" for this.
      >>
      >>In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll
      >>
      >>
      >nicht
      >
      >
      >>Gift essen".
      >>
      >>How do other Germlangs do this?
      >>
      >>What should FS use?
      >>
      >>I'm not really in favour of "man" because it is inherently sexist.
      >>
      >>
      >
      >No it is not. The "man" root originally meant "human being" covering
      >both sexes, and is connected to the same root as "mind", i.e. "a
      >creature with intellect". It is only since the middle ages in
      >English at least that "man" was hijacked by the male of the species.
      >
      >Swedish uses "man"
      >
      >man kan aldrig veta = one never knows
      >man måste leva = one must live
      >
      >So does Dutch
      >
      >men kon niet anders verwachten = one could not expect nothing else
      >
      >Given that it is used in German, Dutch and Swedish at least, seems
      >reason enough to me to use it in FS.
      >
      >R
      >
      >
      >
      >


      I think Old English used "wer" for man a lot of the time. Preserved in
      "werewolf", "wergeld". Related by way of Proto-Indoeuropean to Latin
      "vir" as in "virile".
      According to Etymonline, the connection between "man" and "mind" is not
      accepted by all linguist. But I accept that the earliest usage of the
      word in the germlangs seems to have been "human being" in contract to
      "animal"

      But in the modern germlangs "man" has a default meaning of male of the
      species and using also for "humanity" seems a subtle message about the
      status of the female of the species. Ironically, the non-sexist
      alternative to "man" in English -- human -- comes from the latin word
      for "man". It seems to have been a very common trend in European
      languages, the word for "humanity" becoming also the word for "the male
      of the human species", and thereby implicitly reducing the status of the
      female.. So some sort of universal cultural phenomenon must have
      occurred -- a cultural trait that made men human and women
      other.Hmmmmm... What phenomenon that could have been?. (rhetorical question)

      Yet it seems I can't argue with it from the point of view of what is the
      majority usage. Hmmm maybe I shouldn't be attaching value judgement to
      word -- what makes a "good" folksprâk word should be that which is most
      widely understood. Otherwise some well meaning person will come up with
      the idea that if FS doesn't have a word for "to hate" , we can stop
      FSers from hating eat other.


      >
      >
      >R
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >Browse the draft word lists!
      >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
      >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
      >
      >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
      >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
      >
      >Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • tungol65
      ... covering ... species. ... in ... Latin ... not ... the ... to ... the ... the ... word ... male ... of the ... question) ... is the ... to ... most ...
      Message 2 of 25 , Mar 7, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
        >
        > tungol65 wrote:
        >
        > >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@> wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > >>How should we do this in FS?
        > >>
        > >>Formal English uses "one", as in "One should not eat poison", when
        > >>addressing everybody, but nobody in particular. Informal English
        > >>normally uses "you" for this.
        > >>
        > >>In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll
        > >>
        > >>
        > >nicht
        > >
        > >
        > >>Gift essen".
        > >>
        > >>How do other Germlangs do this?
        > >>
        > >>What should FS use?
        > >>
        > >>I'm not really in favour of "man" because it is inherently sexist.
        > >>
        > >>
        > >
        > >No it is not. The "man" root originally meant "human being"
        covering
        > >both sexes, and is connected to the same root as "mind", i.e. "a
        > >creature with intellect". It is only since the middle ages in
        > >English at least that "man" was hijacked by the male of the
        species.
        > >
        > >Swedish uses "man"
        > >
        > >man kan aldrig veta = one never knows
        > >man måste leva = one must live
        > >
        > >So does Dutch
        > >
        > >men kon niet anders verwachten = one could not expect nothing else
        > >
        > >Given that it is used in German, Dutch and Swedish at least, seems
        > >reason enough to me to use it in FS.
        > >
        > >R
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
        >
        > I think Old English used "wer" for man a lot of the time. Preserved
        in
        > "werewolf", "wergeld". Related by way of Proto-Indoeuropean to
        Latin
        > "vir" as in "virile".
        > According to Etymonline, the connection between "man" and "mind" is
        not
        > accepted by all linguist. But I accept that the earliest usage of
        the
        > word in the germlangs seems to have been "human being" in contract
        to
        > "animal"
        >
        > But in the modern germlangs "man" has a default meaning of male of
        the
        > species and using also for "humanity" seems a subtle message about
        the
        > status of the female of the species. Ironically, the non-sexist
        > alternative to "man" in English -- human -- comes from the latin
        word
        > for "man". It seems to have been a very common trend in European
        > languages, the word for "humanity" becoming also the word for "the
        male
        > of the human species", and thereby implicitly reducing the status
        of the
        > female.. So some sort of universal cultural phenomenon must have
        > occurred -- a cultural trait that made men human and women
        > other.Hmmmmm... What phenomenon that could have been?. (rhetorical
        question)
        >
        > Yet it seems I can't argue with it from the point of view of what
        is the
        > majority usage. Hmmm maybe I shouldn't be attaching value judgement
        to
        > word -- what makes a "good" folksprâk word should be that which is
        most
        > widely understood. Otherwise some well meaning person will come up
        with
        > the idea that if FS doesn't have a word for "to hate" , we can stop
        > FSers from hating eat other.
        >

        Perhaps FSers should take the lead and restore the "man" word back to
        its neutral meaning, but then that leaves us looking for an
        acceptable word for "man" as the male of the species?

        R
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >Browse the draft word lists!
        > >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
        > >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
        > >
        > >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
        > >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
        > >
        > >Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        >
      • David Parke
        Message 3 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          tungol65 wrote:

          >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
          >
          >
          >>tungol65 wrote:
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>>--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@> wrote:
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>>How should we do this in FS?
          >>>>
          >>>>Formal English uses "one", as in "One should not eat poison", when
          >>>>addressing everybody, but nobody in particular. Informal English
          >>>>normally uses "you" for this.
          >>>>
          >>>>In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>nicht
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>>Gift essen".
          >>>>
          >>>>How do other Germlangs do this?
          >>>>
          >>>>What should FS use?
          >>>>
          >>>>I'm not really in favour of "man" because it is inherently sexist.
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>No it is not. The "man" root originally meant "human being"
          >>>
          >>>
          >covering
          >
          >
          >>>both sexes, and is connected to the same root as "mind", i.e. "a
          >>>creature with intellect". It is only since the middle ages in
          >>>English at least that "man" was hijacked by the male of the
          >>>
          >>>
          >species.
          >
          >
          >>>Swedish uses "man"
          >>>
          >>>man kan aldrig veta = one never knows
          >>>man måste leva = one must live
          >>>
          >>>So does Dutch
          >>>
          >>>men kon niet anders verwachten = one could not expect nothing else
          >>>
          >>>Given that it is used in German, Dutch and Swedish at least, seems
          >>>reason enough to me to use it in FS.
          >>>
          >>>R
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>I think Old English used "wer" for man a lot of the time. Preserved
          >>
          >>
          >in
          >
          >
          >>"werewolf", "wergeld". Related by way of Proto-Indoeuropean to
          >>
          >>
          >Latin
          >
          >
          >>"vir" as in "virile".
          >>According to Etymonline, the connection between "man" and "mind" is
          >>
          >>
          >not
          >
          >
          >>accepted by all linguist. But I accept that the earliest usage of
          >>
          >>
          >the
          >
          >
          >>word in the germlangs seems to have been "human being" in contract
          >>
          >>
          >to
          >
          >
          >>"animal"
          >>
          >>But in the modern germlangs "man" has a default meaning of male of
          >>
          >>
          >the
          >
          >
          >>species and using also for "humanity" seems a subtle message about
          >>
          >>
          >the
          >
          >
          >>status of the female of the species. Ironically, the non-sexist
          >>alternative to "man" in English -- human -- comes from the latin
          >>
          >>
          >word
          >
          >
          >>for "man". It seems to have been a very common trend in European
          >>languages, the word for "humanity" becoming also the word for "the
          >>
          >>
          >male
          >
          >
          >>of the human species", and thereby implicitly reducing the status
          >>
          >>
          >of the
          >
          >
          >>female.. So some sort of universal cultural phenomenon must have
          >>occurred -- a cultural trait that made men human and women
          >>other.Hmmmmm... What phenomenon that could have been?. (rhetorical
          >>
          >>
          >question)
          >
          >
          >>Yet it seems I can't argue with it from the point of view of what
          >>
          >>
          >is the
          >
          >
          >>majority usage. Hmmm maybe I shouldn't be attaching value judgement
          >>
          >>
          >to
          >
          >
          >>word -- what makes a "good" folksprâk word should be that which is
          >>
          >>
          >most
          >
          >
          >>widely understood. Otherwise some well meaning person will come up
          >>
          >>
          >with
          >
          >
          >>the idea that if FS doesn't have a word for "to hate" , we can stop
          >>FSers from hating eat other.
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >
          >Perhaps FSers should take the lead and restore the "man" word back to
          >its neutral meaning, but then that leaves us looking for an
          >acceptable word for "man" as the male of the species?
          >
          >R
          >
          >
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>Browse the draft word lists!
          >>>http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
          >>>http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
          >>>
          >>>Browse Folkspraak-related links!
          >>>http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
          >>>
          >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >Browse the draft word lists!
          >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
          >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
          >
          >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
          >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
          >
          >Yahoo! Groups Links
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • David Parke
          ... What about he-man ? Or we could revive wer for male human. Or we could cautiously just leave things the way the are... OK, if so if man or similar
          Message 4 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            tungol65 wrote:

            >
            >>
            >>
            >
            >Perhaps FSers should take the lead and restore the "man" word back to
            >its neutral meaning, but then that leaves us looking for an
            >acceptable word for "man" as the male of the species?
            >
            >R
            >
            >
            What about "he-man"? Or we could revive "wer" for male human. Or we
            could cautiously just leave things the way the are...

            OK, if so if "man" or similar becomes the impersonal pronoun, do we try
            to make it somehow different from the word for "man".
            In Dutch and German, it is a different (yet similar) word. DE man vs
            Mann. NL men vs man. Also do we treat the pronoun as plural or singular,
            1st, 2nd or 3rd person for the purposes of verb inflexion. I realise
            verbs shouldn't inflect for such things ideally in FS, but most members
            seem to be in favour of some irregularity for verbs such as "to be" and
            "to have".
            My suggestion is we use "menn" for the impersonal pronoun and have
            "mann" for male human. "Mann" has a regular pluralisation, so in my
            dialect would be "manne". This frees up "menn" to be used unambigously
            for the impersonal pronoun. Then we make "menn" count as 3rd person
            plural for the purposes of what ever inflexions we decide to have in FS.
            In my grammar, I distinguish between plural and singular subjects for
            verbs: Ik/du/hi/si/ett löp versus wi/ji/dê löpe. Ik/du/hi/si/ett was
            versus wi/ji/dê wâre. So for example: "Dîn mann schuld nejt sûpe bir". =
            Your husband should drink not guzzle beer. "Menn schulde nejt sûpe bir"
            = One should not guzzle beer.
          • Michael Koether
            Hi, I am not a language expert, but.. ... .. man or man/frau ? You wouldn t (or cannot) say Frau soll nicht Gift essen . This frau instead of man thing
            Message 5 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi,

              I am not a language expert, but..

              > In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll nicht
              > Gift essen".

              .."man" or "man/frau"? You wouldn't (or cannot) say "Frau soll nicht
              Gift essen". This "frau" instead of "man" thing is usually just used in
              "jokes", like "man kann das machen.. frau nicht" (one/man can do that..
              woman not), because "man" and "Mann" sound like the same. However, "man"
              is neutral and for both sexes, Mann is male and Frau is female.

              And e.g. if you wanted to say "Man soll nicht Gift essen" for males
              only, then you also cannot say "Mann soll nicht Gift essen" which would
              sound like the first one. You would have to say "Männer sollen nicht
              Gift essen" (Männer = plural of Mann).

              Just wanted to correct this, if there was a missunderstanding.

              Greetings,
              Michael
            • Wolfram Antepohl
              Swedish has Man ska inte äta gift but also (dialectal) En ska inte äta gift . Why not use En in FS? The use of Folk or Liude rather reminds me of
              Message 6 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Swedish has
                "Man ska inte äta gift" but also (dialectal) "En ska inte äta gift".
                Why not use "En" in FS? The use of "Folk" or "Liude" rather reminds me
                of "Was sollen die Leuten denken" or "Vad ska folk tro" (What should
                people think, meaning the others, not us).

                Wolfram
                --
                Wolfram Antepohl
                Gistad Furulid
                590 62 Linghem
                013-125243 / 073-6002667
                wolfram@...
                2006-03-08 kl. 03.35 skrev David Parke:

                > How should we do this in FS?
                >
                > Formal English uses "one", as in "One should not eat poison", when
                > addressing everybody, but nobody in particular. Informal English
                > normally uses "you" for this.
                >
                > In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll nicht
                > Gift essen".
                >
                > How do other Germlangs do this?
                >
                > What should FS use?
                >
                > I'm not really in favour of "man" because it is inherently sexist.
                >
                > What about "folk" or "liude"?
                > "Folk skuld nejt ete gift" or "Liude skulde nejt ete gift".
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Browse the draft word lists!
                > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                >
                > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                >
                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
              • David Parke
                Man/frau was, I believe, a politically-correctism that was in vogue when I was learning German. It was used thus: Man/frau soll nicht Gift essen. Or maybe my
                Message 7 of 25 , Mar 8, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Man/frau was, I believe, a politically-correctism that was in vogue
                  when I was learning German.
                  It was used thus: "Man/frau soll nicht Gift essen."

                  Or maybe my tutors were playing a Witz upon us poor students


                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Michael Koether <dumpdi@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Hi,
                  >
                  > I am not a language expert, but..
                  >
                  > > In German, one would use "man" or "man/frau" for this. "Man soll nicht
                  > > Gift essen".
                  >
                  > .."man" or "man/frau"? You wouldn't (or cannot) say "Frau soll nicht
                  > Gift essen". This "frau" instead of "man" thing is usually just used in
                  > "jokes", like "man kann das machen.. frau nicht" (one/man can do that..
                  > woman not), because "man" and "Mann" sound like the same. However,
                  "man"
                  > is neutral and for both sexes, Mann is male and Frau is female.
                  >
                  > And e.g. if you wanted to say "Man soll nicht Gift essen" for males
                  > only, then you also cannot say "Mann soll nicht Gift essen" which would
                  > sound like the first one. You would have to say "Männer sollen nicht
                  > Gift essen" (Männer = plural of Mann).
                  >
                  > Just wanted to correct this, if there was a missunderstanding.
                  >
                  > Greetings,
                  > Michael
                  >
                • tungol65
                  It looks like the men / man word is only used for the subject. Most of the languages use a word similar to their one for the object and possessive cases.
                  Message 8 of 25 , Mar 10, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    It looks like the "men"/"man" word is only used for the subject. Most
                    of the languages use a word similar to their "one" for the object and
                    possessive cases. English seems to have switched to the "one" word for
                    all cases.

                    subj obj poss
                    EN one one one's
                    NL men ? zijn
                    WF men yen yens
                    NO man en ens
                    DN man en ens
                    SV man en ens

                    Perhaps FS should also follow this pattern "menn", "enn", "enns"?
                    "one" as a number would be spelled "en"


                    R
                  • stefichjo
                    Nice irregularity, I find. But we can easily use ene as a number noun (impersonal pronoun) and en as a number. Bye, Stephan
                    Message 9 of 25 , Mar 10, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Nice irregularity, I find. But we can easily use "ene" as a number
                      noun (impersonal pronoun) and "en" as a number.

                      Bye,
                      Stephan

                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > It looks like the "men"/"man" word is only used for the subject. Most
                      > of the languages use a word similar to their "one" for the object and
                      > possessive cases. English seems to have switched to the "one" word for
                      > all cases.
                      >
                      > subj obj poss
                      > EN one one one's
                      > NL men ? zijn
                      > WF men yen yens
                      > NO man en ens
                      > DN man en ens
                      > SV man en ens
                      >
                      > Perhaps FS should also follow this pattern "menn", "enn", "enns"?
                      > "one" as a number would be spelled "en"
                      >
                      >
                      > R
                      >
                    • David Parke
                      You don t have High German in that table? Does man change for case in DE? Also in the other languages, how does the pronoun behave in terms of number? In
                      Message 10 of 25 , Mar 10, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        You don't have High German in that table? Does "man" change for case in DE?

                        Also in the other languages, how does the pronoun behave in terms of
                        number? In English and german, it's a third person singular. But in
                        Dutch, is it "men zijn...", "men is...", "men bent..."?

                        stefichjo wrote:

                        >Nice irregularity, I find. But we can easily use "ene" as a number
                        >noun (impersonal pronoun) and "en" as a number.
                        >
                        >Bye,
                        >Stephan
                        >
                        >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@...> wrote:
                        >
                        >
                        >>It looks like the "men"/"man" word is only used for the subject. Most
                        >>of the languages use a word similar to their "one" for the object and
                        >>possessive cases. English seems to have switched to the "one" word for
                        >>all cases.
                        >>
                        >> subj obj poss
                        >>EN one one one's
                        >>NL men ? zijn
                        >>WF men yen yens
                        >>NO man en ens
                        >>DN man en ens
                        >>SV man en ens
                        >>
                        >>Perhaps FS should also follow this pattern "menn", "enn", "enns"?
                        >>"one" as a number would be spelled "en"
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>R
                        >>
                        >>
                        >>
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >Browse the draft word lists!
                        >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                        >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                        >
                        >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                        >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                        >
                        >Yahoo! Groups Links
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                      • tungol65
                        ... case in DE? No my German is not that good and I could not find it in any of my grammars at the time. From my translation software (not online), it looks
                        Message 11 of 25 , Mar 11, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > You don't have High German in that table? Does "man" change for
                          case in DE?

                          No my German is not that good and I could not find it in any of my
                          grammars at the time. From my translation software (not online), it
                          looks like the German pattern is man (subj), einen (obj) and sein(e)
                          (poss).

                          One must keep one's word. = Man muß sein Wort halten.
                          One should love one's children = Man sollte seine Kinder lieben.

                          > Also in the other languages, how does the pronoun behave in terms
                          of
                          > number? In English and german, it's a third person singular. But
                          in
                          > Dutch, is it "men zijn...", "men is...", "men bent..."?

                          From what I can see in the Scandinavian languages it is singular,
                          but difficult to tell since they don't generally decline their verbs
                          for number either. In West Frisian it is also difficult to tell
                          since the verbs I've seen it used with could be singular or plural.

                          One must keep one's word. = Yens wird moat men hâlde.

                          Since in my version of FS, at least I don't decline verbs for
                          number, it does not matter which it is. But as an English speaker I
                          would tend to regard is as singular.


                          > stefichjo wrote:
                          >
                          > >Nice irregularity, I find. But we can easily use "ene" as a number
                          > >noun (impersonal pronoun) and "en" as a number.
                          > >
                          > >Bye,
                          > >Stephan
                          > >
                          > >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "tungol65" <rdw.young@> wrote:
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >>It looks like the "men"/"man" word is only used for the subject.
                          Most
                          > >>of the languages use a word similar to their "one" for the
                          object and
                          > >>possessive cases. English seems to have switched to the "one"
                          word for
                          > >>all cases.
                          > >>
                          > >> subj obj poss
                          > >>EN one one one's
                          > >>NL men ? zijn
                          > >>WF men yen yens
                          > >>NO man en ens
                          > >>DN man en ens
                          > >>SV man en ens
                          > >>
                          > >>Perhaps FS should also follow this pattern "menn", "enn", "enns"?
                          > >>"one" as a number would be spelled "en"
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >>R
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >>
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >Browse the draft word lists!
                          > >http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                          > >http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                          > >
                          > >Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                          > >http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                          > >
                          > >Yahoo! Groups Links
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          > >
                          >
                        • Wolfram Antepohl
                          ... Right. Einen / eine / eines is akk obj, einem / einer / einem is dat obj. Sein and the respective declination forms are not only possessive but also
                          Message 12 of 25 , Mar 11, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            2006-03-11 kl. 09.31 skrev tungol65:

                            > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
                            >>
                            >> You don't have High German in that table? Does "man" change for
                            > case in DE?
                            >
                            > No my German is not that good and I could not find it in any of my
                            > grammars at the time. From my translation software (not online), it
                            > looks like the German pattern is man (subj), einen (obj) and sein(e)
                            > (poss).

                            Right. "Einen"/"eine"/"eines" is akk obj, "einem"/"einer"/"einem" is
                            dat obj. "Sein" and the respective declination forms are not only
                            possessive but also reflexive - they cannot stand alone. I don't think
                            there is a pure genitive form of "man" that could stand on its own in
                            German.

                            >
                            > One must keep one's word. = Man muß sein Wort halten.
                            > One should love one's children = Man sollte seine Kinder lieben.

                            >
                            > From what I can see in the Scandinavian languages it is singular,
                            > but difficult to tell since they don't generally decline their verbs
                            > for number either.

                            "Man" is sIngular at least in Swedish, as is the dialect form "en". You
                            could still see this in older texts (from a time when Swedish still
                            used conjugation): Man är (not äro - the old 3rd person plural).

                            Wolfram
                          • Roly Sookias
                            Just want to make you all aware that I ve started a page on PG phonemes (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to contribute as much as you
                            Message 13 of 25 , Mar 12, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG phonemes
                              (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to contribute as
                              much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a comprehensive
                              list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development in the
                              subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments (particularly
                              the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                            • David Parke
                              ... contribute as ... comprehensive ... in the ... (particularly ... With let and lassen , the vowel is from PG *æ:, so in that context, the vowel
                              Message 14 of 25 , Mar 12, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@...> wrote:
                                >
                                > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG phonemes
                                > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                contribute as
                                > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                comprehensive
                                > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development
                                in the
                                > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                (particularly
                                > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                                >

                                With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *æ:, so in that context,
                                the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV låta. *æ: typically
                                becomes æ: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern English.
                              • David Parke
                                ... phonemes ... Don t forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and become e. PG *sagjan NL zeggen. PG *skapjan - NL scheppen. EN man, plural men.
                                Message 15 of 25 , Mar 12, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@> wrote:
                                  > >
                                  > > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG
                                  phonemes
                                  > > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                  > contribute as
                                  > > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                  > comprehensive
                                  > > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development
                                  > in the
                                  > > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                  > (particularly
                                  > > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                                  > >
                                  >
                                  > With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *æ:, so in that context,
                                  > the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV låta. *æ: typically
                                  > becomes æ: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern English.
                                  >

                                  Don't forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and become e.
                                  PG *sagjan > NL zeggen. PG *skapjan -> NL scheppen. EN man, plural
                                  men. EN old, (< OE ald or eald) comparative elder. EN long (<OE lang),
                                  length.
                                  In NL,*a followed by *ld, *lt assymilated the l and became ou. (NL oud
                                  < ald)
                                • Roly Sookias
                                  Cool. Thanks. Sorry for the error - I ll change it, but if you see any others ever please do feel free to change them, and also please do add whatever you like
                                  Message 16 of 25 , Mar 12, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Cool. Thanks. Sorry for the error - I'll change it, but if you see any
                                    others ever please do feel free to change them, and also please do add
                                    whatever you like to the page - it's meant as a communal project.

                                    -----Original Message-----
                                    From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com [mailto:folkspraak@yahoogroups.com] On
                                    Behalf Of David Parke
                                    Sent: 13 March 2006 00:34
                                    To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                    Subject: [folkspraak] Re: PG page on wiki

                                    --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@> wrote:
                                    > >
                                    > > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG
                                    phonemes
                                    > > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                    > contribute as
                                    > > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                    > comprehensive
                                    > > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development
                                    > in the
                                    > > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                    > (particularly
                                    > > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                                    > >
                                    >
                                    > With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *æ:, so in that context,
                                    > the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV låta. *æ: typically
                                    > becomes æ: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern English.
                                    >

                                    Don't forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and become e.
                                    PG *sagjan > NL zeggen. PG *skapjan -> NL scheppen. EN man, plural
                                    men. EN old, (< OE ald or eald) comparative elder. EN long (<OE lang),
                                    length.
                                    In NL,*a followed by *ld, *lt assymilated the l and became ou. (NL oud
                                    < ald)









                                    Browse the draft word lists!
                                    http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                                    http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html

                                    Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                                    http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/

                                    Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  • stefichjo
                                    ... case in DE?Table with DE: subj obj poss DE einer einen/m sein EN one one one s NL men ? zijn WF men yen yens
                                    Message 17 of 25 , Mar 13, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > You don't have High German in that table? Does "man" change for
                                      case in DE?Table with DE:

                                      subj obj poss
                                      DE einer einen/m sein
                                      EN one one one's
                                      NL men ? zijn
                                      WF men yen yens
                                      NO man en ens
                                      DN man en ens
                                      SV man en ens

                                      So as you can see, "man" changes and one can also say "einer" in the
                                      nominative case instead.




                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Evert Mouw <yahoo@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > The Wiki is not used by anyone? Some FS devs should consider using
                                      it to
                                      > add more permanent contributions to FS. Contributions by the
                                      mailinglist
                                      > don't last for long.
                                      >
                                      > http://www.tidingkonien.com/wiki

                                      I don't know how to add contents. I pasted some Hitchhiker's Guide
                                      into the sandbox so far...



                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@...> wrote:
                                      >
                                      > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG
                                      phonemes
                                      > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                      contribute as
                                      > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                      comprehensive
                                      > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development
                                      in the
                                      > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                      (particularly
                                      > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.

                                      This is cool! I have started to do something similar on the PG
                                      diphtongs (for German). Please take a look at:

                                      http://de.wikibooks.org/wiki/Folksprak/_Referenzgrammatik#Ablautung

                                      PG æ, au, eu, ai, ei are treated here for German words.

                                      I hope I will be able to add the other PG vowels soon.


                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:

                                      > With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *æ:, so in that
                                      context,
                                      > the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV låta. *æ: typically
                                      > becomes æ: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern English.

                                      I found that PG æ ("spræk") turn so "aa" in German ("Sprache"
                                      (notebly with a long "a" before "ch", which is unique, I think),
                                      which corresponds to "å" in Danish ("språg"). In English it turns
                                      to "ee": "speech". Also:

                                      dæd - Tat - ? - deed
                                      sæd - Saat - ? - seed


                                      --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
                                      > Don't forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and become e.
                                      > PG *sagjan > NL zeggen. PG *skapjan -> NL scheppen. EN man, plural
                                      > men. EN old, (< OE ald or eald) comparative elder. EN long (<OE
                                      lang),
                                      > length.
                                      > In NL,*a followed by *ld, *lt assymilated the l and became ou. (NL
                                      oud
                                      > < ald)

                                      Yes. There are various "trajectories" of vowels: umlauting,
                                      diphtongization and monophtongization... I tried to respect them in
                                      my Folksprak-Writing.

                                      "l" is obmitted/weakened in many Berlinish words, too, like in "kalt"
                                      and "alt" (sounds a bit like "kawt" and "awt").


                                      Regards,
                                      Stephan Schneider
                                    • David Parke
                                      ... Hmmm, so it is not quite so clear-cut a case for using man ... One definitely seems to be the majority form that is used in the object case. I guess
                                      Message 18 of 25 , Mar 13, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        stefichjo wrote:

                                        >--- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, David Parke <parked@...> wrote:
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >>You don't have High German in that table? Does "man" change for
                                        >>
                                        >>
                                        >case in DE?Table with DE:
                                        >
                                        > subj obj poss
                                        >DE einer einen/m sein
                                        >EN one one one's
                                        >NL men ? zijn
                                        >WF men yen yens
                                        >NO man en ens
                                        >DN man en ens
                                        >SV man en ens
                                        >
                                        >So as you can see, "man" changes and one can also say "einer" in the
                                        >nominative case instead.
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        Hmmm, so it is not quite so clear-cut a case for using "man"...
                                        "One" definitely seems to be the majority form that is used in the
                                        object case. I guess that means that the pronoun must be treated as
                                        singular for the purposes of verbs the agree by number.
                                      • David Parke
                                        I m not so sure that representing PG phonemes with SAMPA or IPA is really the wisest thing, since it implies a level of certainty about the exact pronunciation
                                        Message 19 of 25 , Mar 14, 2006
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          I'm not so sure that representing PG phonemes with SAMPA or IPA is
                                          really the wisest thing, since it implies a level of certainty about
                                          the exact pronunciation to which few scholars would want to admit. The
                                          phonemes are educated guesses. We can determine the number of phonemes
                                          and their relationship to each other and their relationship to
                                          phonemes in the earliest recorded germlangs, but since no one was
                                          there with a tape recorder, the exact prono is an educated guess. For
                                          example, PG *æ was postulated based on the way cognate words had ā in
                                          Old Saxon and Old High German, Ä" in Gothic, ǽ in Old English and á in
                                          Old Norse. *æ was considered the most average sound, by the
                                          comparitive method, most likely to produced such divergent sounds in
                                          the earlier recorded Germanic languages. Of course the exact prono of
                                          these languages can't be determined with absolute certainty either.

                                          Why don't you use the conventional notation for vowels in PG? The only
                                          problem is with long *æ. Since this phoneme had no short version , you
                                          need not mark it with a lengthener (or maybe its short version was "a"
                                          or "e", since neither of these vowel had a long version in PG). Just
                                          leave it as æ. The other long vowels could be marked with
                                          circumflexes, if this is more practical/easier than using a macron.


                                          --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@...> wrote:
                                          >
                                          > Cool. Thanks. Sorry for the error - I'll change it, but if you see any
                                          > others ever please do feel free to change them, and also please do add
                                          > whatever you like to the page - it's meant as a communal project.
                                          >
                                          > -----Original Message-----
                                          > From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com [mailto:folkspraak@yahoogroups.com] On
                                          > Behalf Of David Parke
                                          > Sent: 13 March 2006 00:34
                                          > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                          > Subject: [folkspraak] Re: PG page on wiki
                                          >
                                          > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@> wrote:
                                          > >
                                          > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@> wrote:
                                          > > >
                                          > > > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on PG
                                          > phonemes
                                          > > > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                          > > contribute as
                                          > > > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                          > > comprehensive
                                          > > > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their development
                                          > > in the
                                          > > > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                          > > (particularly
                                          > > > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                                          > > >
                                          > >
                                          > > With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *�:, so in that context,
                                          > > the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV l�ta. *�: typically
                                          > > becomes �: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern English.
                                          > >
                                          >
                                          > Don't forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and become e.
                                          > PG *sagjan > NL zeggen. PG *skapjan -> NL scheppen. EN man, plural
                                          > men. EN old, (< OE ald or eald) comparative elder. EN long (<OE lang),
                                          > length.
                                          > In NL,*a followed by *ld, *lt assymilated the l and became ou. (NL oud
                                          > < ald)
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Browse the draft word lists!
                                          > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                                          > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                                          >
                                          > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                                          > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                        • Evert Mouw
                                          David, you may want to add your comments (below) to the discussion on the Wiki: http://tidingkonien.com/wiki/index.php/Folkspraak/PGPhonemes You may decide to
                                          Message 20 of 25 , Mar 14, 2006
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            David, you may want to add your comments (below) to the discussion on
                                            the Wiki:
                                            http://tidingkonien.com/wiki/index.php/Folkspraak/PGPhonemes
                                            You may decide to start a sub- article or something like that.

                                            David Parke wrote:
                                            > I'm not so sure that representing PG phonemes with SAMPA or IPA is
                                            > really the wisest thing, since it implies a level of certainty about
                                            > the exact pronunciation to which few scholars would want to admit. The
                                            > phonemes are educated guesses. We can determine the number of phonemes
                                            > and their relationship to each other and their relationship to
                                            > phonemes in the earliest recorded germlangs, but since no one was
                                            > there with a tape recorder, the exact prono is an educated guess. For
                                            > example, PG *æ was postulated based on the way cognate words had � in
                                            > Old Saxon and Old High German, Ä" in Gothic, ǽ in Old English and á in
                                            > Old Norse. *æ was considered the most average sound, by the
                                            > comparitive method, most likely to produced such divergent sounds in
                                            > the earlier recorded Germanic languages. Of course the exact prono of
                                            > these languages can't be determined with absolute certainty either.
                                            >
                                            > Why don't you use the conventional notation for vowels in PG? The only
                                            > problem is with long *æ. Since this phoneme had no short version , you
                                            > need not mark it with a lengthener (or maybe its short version was "a"
                                            > or "e", since neither of these vowel had a long version in PG). Just
                                            > leave it as æ. The other long vowels could be marked with
                                            > circumflexes, if this is more practical/easier than using a macron.
                                          • Roly Sookias/Roley Sukius
                                            Yeah sure. I just did it for neutrality - it wasn t meant to be exact and it s all in phonemic slashes anyway. If you want to change it, please do. ... about
                                            Message 21 of 25 , Mar 14, 2006
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Yeah sure. I just did it for neutrality - it wasn't meant to be
                                              exact and it's all in phonemic slashes anyway. If you want to change
                                              it, please do.

                                              --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@...> wrote:
                                              >
                                              > I'm not so sure that representing PG phonemes with SAMPA or IPA is
                                              > really the wisest thing, since it implies a level of certainty
                                              about
                                              > the exact pronunciation to which few scholars would want to admit.
                                              The
                                              > phonemes are educated guesses. We can determine the number of
                                              phonemes
                                              > and their relationship to each other and their relationship to
                                              > phonemes in the earliest recorded germlangs, but since no one was
                                              > there with a tape recorder, the exact prono is an educated guess.
                                              For
                                              > example, PG *æ was postulated based on the way cognate words had
                                              ā in
                                              > Old Saxon and Old High German, Ä" in Gothic, ǽ in Old English and
                                              á in
                                              > Old Norse. *æ was considered the most average sound, by the
                                              > comparitive method, most likely to produced such divergent sounds
                                              in
                                              > the earlier recorded Germanic languages. Of course the exact prono
                                              of
                                              > these languages can't be determined with absolute certainty either.
                                              >
                                              > Why don't you use the conventional notation for vowels in PG? The
                                              only
                                              > problem is with long *æ. Since this phoneme had no short
                                              version , you
                                              > need not mark it with a lengthener (or maybe its short version
                                              was "a"
                                              > or "e", since neither of these vowel had a long version in PG).
                                              Just
                                              > leave it as æ. The other long vowels could be marked with
                                              > circumflexes, if this is more practical/easier than using a macron.
                                              >
                                              >
                                              > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@> wrote:
                                              > >
                                              > > Cool. Thanks. Sorry for the error - I'll change it, but if you
                                              see any
                                              > > others ever please do feel free to change them, and also please
                                              do add
                                              > > whatever you like to the page - it's meant as a communal
                                              project.
                                              > >
                                              > > -----Original Message-----
                                              > > From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                              [mailto:folkspraak@yahoogroups.com] On
                                              > > Behalf Of David Parke
                                              > > Sent: 13 March 2006 00:34
                                              > > To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                              > > Subject: [folkspraak] Re: PG page on wiki
                                              > >
                                              > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@> wrote:
                                              > > >
                                              > > > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "Roly Sookias" <xipirho@>
                                              wrote:
                                              > > > >
                                              > > > > Just want to make you all aware that I've started a page on
                                              PG
                                              > > phonemes
                                              > > > > (Folkspraak/PGPhonemes) on the wiki, and to invite you all to
                                              > > > contribute as
                                              > > > > much as you can to it. On the page I want to get together a
                                              > > > comprehensive
                                              > > > > list of all the phonemes with as much info about their
                                              development
                                              > > > in the
                                              > > > > subsequent languages as possible, and why these developments
                                              > > > (particularly
                                              > > > > the slightly odd/irregular seeming ones) occurred.
                                              > > > >
                                              > > >
                                              > > > With "let" and "lassen", the vowel is from PG *�:, so in
                                              that context,
                                              > > > the vowel evolution isn't so weird. NL laten, SV l�ta. *�:
                                              typically
                                              > > > becomes �: or e: in OE and then [i:] or [E] in Modern
                                              English.
                                              > > >
                                              > >
                                              > > Don't forget that PG *a could be subject to i-mutation and
                                              become e.
                                              > > PG *sagjan > NL zeggen. PG *skapjan -> NL scheppen. EN man,
                                              plural
                                              > > men. EN old, (< OE ald or eald) comparative elder. EN long (<OE
                                              lang),
                                              > > length.
                                              > > In NL,*a followed by *ld, *lt assymilated the l and became ou.
                                              (NL oud
                                              > > < ald)
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > >
                                              > > Browse the draft word lists!
                                              > > http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                                              > > http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html
                                              > >
                                              > > Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                                              > > http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/
                                              > >
                                              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                              > >
                                              >
                                            • Roly Sookias
                                              Interesting extra option David. I ll add it as a proper option, if that s OK (or you could I think - I ve given you manager status; sorry for not doing so
                                              Message 22 of 25 , Mar 15, 2006
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                Interesting extra option David. I'll add it as a proper option, if that's OK
                                                (or you could I think - I've given you manager status; sorry for not doing
                                                so earlier) and you can change your vote to vote for that option if you
                                                like.
                                              • Roly Sookias
                                                Oops. Thought you could add options without deleting the votes, but you can t, so I ll leave it. Soz. ... From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                                Message 23 of 25 , Mar 15, 2006
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Oops. Thought you could add options without deleting the votes, but you
                                                  can't, so I'll leave it. Soz.

                                                  -----Original Message-----
                                                  From: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com [mailto:folkspraak@yahoogroups.com] On
                                                  Behalf Of Roly Sookias
                                                  Sent: 15 March 2006 16:45
                                                  To: folkspraak@yahoogroups.com
                                                  Subject: [folkspraak] Poll on "the"

                                                  Interesting extra option David. I'll add it as a proper option, if that's OK
                                                  (or you could I think - I've given you manager status; sorry for not doing
                                                  so earlier) and you can change your vote to vote for that option if you
                                                  like.




                                                  Browse the draft word lists!
                                                  http://www.onelist.com/files/folkspraak/
                                                  http://www.langmaker.com/folkspraak/volcab.html

                                                  Browse Folkspraak-related links!
                                                  http://www.onelist.com/links/folkspraak/

                                                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.