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

Alternate teminology

Expand Messages
  • Peter Collier
    If linguists *there* used the term Germanic for a group of northern Romance languages and dialects (aproximately covering the areas of *our* Hochdeutsch and
    Message 1 of 9 , Jul 6, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      If linguists *there* used the term "Germanic" for a group of northern Romance languages and dialects (aproximately covering the areas of *our* Hochdeutsch and Mitteldeutsch), does anyone have any thoughts on what term might be used instead for the (remaining) languages, which we would call "Germanic" *here* (Low German, Dutch, Frisian, English and the Nordic languages)?

      I'm leaning towards Saxonic, but I also think Nordic (in an expanded sense, with some other more specific term like Scandic for Norwegian et al) would be quite possible - as these languages would be "Northern" from a Romance point of view.

      Any ideas?



      Peter.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Carl Edlund Anderson
      ... Picking up on your Scandic idea, what about Gothonic ? (Reflecting a view that all those Northern types were somehow connected with Goths of one stripe
      Message 2 of 9 , Jul 6, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        On 06 Jul 2007, at 18:27, Peter Collier wrote:
        > does anyone have any thoughts on what term might be used instead
        > for the (remaining) languages, which we would call "Germanic"
        > *here* (Low German, Dutch, Frisian, English and the Nordic languages)?
        > I'm leaning towards Saxonic, but I also think Nordic (in an
        > expanded sense, with some other more specific term like Scandic for
        > Norwegian et al) would be quite possible - as these languages would
        > be "Northern" from a Romance point of view.
        > Any ideas?

        Picking up on your Scandic idea, what about "Gothonic"? (Reflecting a
        view that "all those Northern types" were somehow connected with
        Goths of one stripe of another.) Back in the somewhat more
        Romantically-inclined day (late '20s, I think), the English
        translation of Danish philologist Gudmund Schütte's _Vor Folkegruppe
        Gottjod_ was titled _Our Forefathers: The Gothonic Nations_ (with the
        further subtitle "a manual of the ethnography of the Gothic, German,
        Dutch, Anglo-Saxon, Frisian and Scandinavian peoples").

        Neither the ethnography nor the term "Gothonic" stand up well by
        modern academic standards :) but for a term coined by Romance
        philologists _there_ to describe "Germanic", it might well do.

        Cheers,
        Carl

        --
        Carl Edlund Anderson
        http://www.carlaz.com/
      • Padraic Brown
        ... Perhaps I m missing something... Why would they call certain Romance languages Germanic but not the others? I hope you re nor positing a world of stupid
        Message 3 of 9 , Jul 6, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          --- Peter Collier <petecollier@...> wrote:

          > If linguists *there* used the term "Germanic" for a group
          > of northern Romance languages and dialects (aproximately
          > covering the areas of *our* Hochdeutsch and
          > Mitteldeutsch), does anyone have any thoughts on what
          > term might be used instead for the (remaining) languages,
          > which we would call "Germanic" *here* (Low German, Dutch,
          > Frisian, English and the Nordic languages)?

          Perhaps I'm missing something... Why would they call
          certain Romance languages "Germanic" but not the others? I
          hope you're nor positing a world of stupid linguists that
          can't differentiate related languages of separate families!

          I guess if you mean "Germanic" to be a sub-grouping of
          Romance languages, then I would suspect that "Romance" is
          already used as a general term for all Latin derived
          languages (of which these "Germanic" languages are a group)
          and also that there is some other word for Germanic
          languages, like "Teutonic".

          > I'm leaning towards Saxonic, but I also think Nordic (in
          > an expanded sense, with some other more specific term
          > like Scandic for Norwegian et al) would be quite possible
          > - as these languages would be "Northern" from a Romance
          > point of view.

          Me I think "Saxonic" and "Nordic" are too local sounding,
          too regional. If not "Teutonic", then how about "Allemanic"
          (based on an old Latin name for the Germanic tribes)?

          > Any ideas?

          Padraic

          >
          >
          >
          > Peter.
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >


          --
          There was a musician named Packett,
          who'd had it, he just couldn't hack it;
          he stood with care
          on a cane backed chair
          and impaled himself on a rackett.

          --

          Ill Bethisad --
          <http://www.bethisad.com>


          Come visit The World! --
          <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







          .
        • Peter Collier
          ... From: Padraic Brown To: Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 10:57 PM Subject: Re: [romconlang] Alternate
          Message 4 of 9 , Jul 6, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@...>
            To: <romconlang@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Friday, July 06, 2007 10:57 PM
            Subject: Re: [romconlang] Alternate teminology




            > Perhaps I'm missing something... Why would they call
            > certain Romance languages "Germanic" but not the others? I
            > hope you're nor positing a world of stupid linguists that
            > can't differentiate related languages of separate families!

            A brief con-history: Romans sucessfully colonise Germania and in a large
            portion of that area a Latin dialect surplants the original Germanic
            vernacular. The Romance dialects that evolve in that region are referred to
            as Germanic, beacuse they are the dialects from Germania, in the same way as
            you also have iberic, gallic and italic dialects/languages. If you prefer, a
            synonym for this imaginary description of Germanic might be "Northern
            Romance", to contrast with Western and Eastern. It has nothing to do with
            what in reality *here* we call Germanic.

            > I guess if you mean "Germanic" to be a sub-grouping of
            > Romance languages, then I would suspect that "Romance" is
            > already used as a general term for all Latin derived
            > languages (of which these "Germanic" languages are a group)
            > and also that there is some other word for Germanic
            > languages, like "Teutonic".

            Precisely. Romance is the overarching family, which is is divided into 3
            main groups, the two real ones and my imaginary third, which are then
            further divided into the various latin based modern languages and dialects.
            If you like, think of the River Rhine and the Limes as a second
            "Spezia-Rimini" Line.

            But if the word "Germanic" is used for a subgroup of Romance languages, it
            would not be used to refer to the language familiy that encorporates Low
            German/LowSaxon, Dutch, Danish etc. That family would be called something
            else, and that is what i was wondering about.


            > Me I think "Saxonic" and "Nordic" are too local sounding,
            > too regional. If not "Teutonic", then how about "Allemanic"
            > (based on an old Latin name for the Germanic tribes)?

            Teutonic would work, but I have no languages left whose speakers refer to
            themselves as Deutsch/Dutch/Duits, so I had put that expression to one side.
            The langauge we call Dutch in English is Nederlands to them, and in the
            absence of what we call German (Hochdeutsch), I suspect the language in
            Northern Germany, if it is differentiated from that of the Netherlands at
            all, would be called (Low-) Saxon (the real local dialect is of course
            Neddersässich) or perhaps, if political history followed a smilar course,
            Prussian.

            Allemanic is a non-starter. In my mixed up linguistic world it exists, but
            slap bang in the middle of the Romance dialectal continuum: "Norzro Pfatter,
            qui y sy Kli escht, sankchte schjas zu Nom. Zu Ric vinjit. Zu Volunzas
            schjas tacte, supre sa Zer quomt y sy Klu..."
          • Padraic Brown
            ... Thanks for the explanation! It cleared everything up. ... Well, it is an old word used to refer to Germanic peoples. One supposes that linguisticians could
            Message 5 of 9 , Jul 6, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              --- Peter Collier <petecollier@...> wrote:

              > A brief con-history: Romans sucessfully colonise Germania

              Thanks for the explanation! It cleared everything up.

              > > Me I think "Saxonic" and "Nordic" are too local
              > sounding,
              > > too regional. If not "Teutonic", then how about
              > "Allemanic"
              > > (based on an old Latin name for the Germanic tribes)?
              >
              > Teutonic would work, but I have no languages left whose
              > speakers refer to
              > themselves as Deutsch/Dutch/Duits, so I had put that
              > expression to one side.

              Well, it is an old word used to refer to Germanic peoples.
              One supposes that linguisticians could revive the word to
              refer to the language family.

              > The langauge we call Dutch in English is Nederlands to
              > them, and in the
              > absence of what we call German (Hochdeutsch),

              So, all of Germany is Romance speaking? Austria too?

              Padraic


              --
              There was a musician named Packett,
              who'd had it, he just couldn't hack it;
              he stood with care
              on a cane backed chair
              and impaled himself on a rackett.

              --

              Ill Bethisad --
              <http://www.bethisad.com>


              Come visit The World! --
              <http://www.geocities.com/hawessos/>







              .
            • Benct Philip Jonsson
              Definitely Teutonic . See , That the historical Teutons who Marius fought against were
              Message 6 of 9 , Jul 7, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                Definitely "Teutonic". See
                <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teutonic>,
                <http://www.tfd.com/teutonic>

                That the historical Teutons who Marius fought against were
                probably Celts is another matter. The root _*teuto-_
                'people' is common to Celtic and Germanic (and Balto-
                Slavic). A derivative of its Germanic form, _*þeudisko-_,
                gave the Carolingian Latin term _Theotiska lingua_ 'German
                (Deutsch) language'.

                Peter Collier skrev:
                > If linguists *there* used the term "Germanic" for a group
                > of northern Romance languages and dialects (aproximately
                > covering the areas of *our* Hochdeutsch and
                > Mitteldeutsch), does anyone have any thoughts on what term
                > might be used instead for the (remaining) languages, which
                > we would call "Germanic" *here* (Low German, Dutch,
                > Frisian, English and the Nordic languages)?
                >
                > I'm leaning towards Saxonic, but I also think Nordic (in
                > an expanded sense, with some other more specific term like
                > Scandic for Norwegian et al) would be quite possible - as
                > these languages would be "Northern" from a Romance point
                > of view.
                >
                > Any ideas?
                >
                >
                >
                > Peter.
              • Peter Collier
                ... From: Padraic Brown To: Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 6:53 AM Subject: Re: [romconlang] Alternate
                Message 7 of 9 , Jul 7, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Padraic Brown" <elemtilas@...>
                  To: <romconlang@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 6:53 AM
                  Subject: Re: [romconlang] Alternate teminology



                  > So, all of Germany is Romance speaking? Austria too?
                  >
                  > Padraic

                  Not quite - I've replaced the upper and cenral German dialects with a
                  Romance ones, Low German/Low Saxon (Neddersässich) still exists as *here*,
                  although I may have a play at that later. I suppose that means
                  con-politically "Germany" wouldn't exist, as there would be no common
                  national identity in 1848 or 71. You'd be looking at a protestant, Saxon
                  speaking North German state (Prussia? Saxony?) and a catholic, Romance
                  speaking Austo-Bavarian state which would presumably eventually come to also
                  incorporate Baden and Württemberg. Assuming our 'Roman' Hapsburgs dominated
                  the Southern state, then Swizerland would be a separate state for the same
                  reasons as here, but with my language taking its palce alongside French and
                  Italian in lieu of Schwyzertüutsch.


                  Pete
                • Jan van Steenbergen
                  ... a ... So, no High German language *there*, right? That s probably a good decision. Shortly after I started Wenedyk, I contemplated the possibility of
                  Message 8 of 9 , Aug 14, 2007
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- Peter Collier skrzypszy:

                    > > So, all of Germany is Romance speaking? Austria too?
                    > >
                    > > Padraic
                    >
                    > Not quite - I've replaced the upper and cenral German dialects with
                    a
                    > Romance ones, Low German/Low Saxon (Neddersässich) still exists as
                    > *here*,

                    So, no High German language *there*, right? That's probably a good
                    decision. Shortly after I started Wenedyk, I contemplated the
                    possibility of Wenedyk and Polish coexisting in the same coniverse,
                    but discarded that as highly unlikely. In other words, if you replace
                    High German with whatever your language is called entirely, you can
                    steal from it as much as you wish!

                    That also solves frees the name "Teutonic" for the rest of the
                    Germanic languages, there not being a language called "Deutsch". Low
                    Saxon, in my opinion, is not German.

                    > although I may have a play at that later. I suppose that means
                    > con-politically "Germany" wouldn't exist, as there would be no
                    > common national identity in 1848 or 71.

                    Most definitely!

                    Jan

                    __________

                    "The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be
                    born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future
                    or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain."
                    — G'Kar quoting G'Quon, Babylon 5

                    http://steen.free.fr/



                    _________________________________________________________
                    Alt i én. Få Yahoo! Mail med adressekartotek, kalender og
                    notisblokk. http://no.mail.yahoo.com
                  • Peter Collier
                    Jan van Steenbergen wrote: So, no High German language *there*, right? That s probably a good decision. Shortly after I started
                    Message 9 of 9 , Aug 14, 2007
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Jan van Steenbergen <ijzeren_jan@...> wrote: So, no High German language *there*, right? That's probably a good
                      decision. Shortly after I started Wenedyk, I contemplated the
                      possibility of Wenedyk and Polish coexisting in the same coniverse,
                      but discarded that as highly unlikely. In other words, if you replace
                      High German with whatever your language is called entirely, you can
                      steal from it as much as you wish!

                      Correct.

                      That also solves frees the name "Teutonic" for the rest of the
                      Germanic languages, there not being a language called "Deutsch". Low
                      Saxon, in my opinion, is not German.

                      Yes. Low Saxon to my mind is basically Dutch. Well, the otherway round really.

                      > although I may have a play at that later. I suppose that means
                      > con-politically "Germany" wouldn't exist, as there would be no
                      > common national identity in 1848 or 71.

                      Most definitely!


                      It's amazing how much something as "simple" as language affects history. Presumably, with a Romance Hapsburg Empire, and a Saxon northern Europe you'd end up with Bavaria, Baden et al iin the Hapsburg sphere and perhaps Prussia in the north. But without the struggle for control of "Grossdeutschland" would you still have an Austro-Prussian war? Would Prussia absorb the remaining north "German" states, or would we see a larger Denmark, maybe Pomerania still Swedish, or Hannover remaining as an independent kingdom? Would there have been world wars as we know them, or would we still be living in a "Congress" Europe? Would there even have been a Congress of Vienna? It gets very complicated very quickly!

                      Peter


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.