pielewe wrote:
> It is usual to let the concept of "Dutch" resp. "German" dialect
> coincide with the standard languages involved, i.e. with the state
> borders.
But this didn't occur to my mind when I put my question. Moreoever,
we see that the traditional German "Kleinstaaterei" (which was a
characteristic to the Holy Roman Empire of German Nation, i.e. the
Eastern part of the Carolingian Empire) is still alive and well:
German Switzerland, Liechtenstein and Austria are separate states,
i.e. separate citizenships, although the mother tongue and the
standard state language is the same German as in Berlin, Hamburg,
Köln, Munich.
> Of course
> if it would become customary to attach political significance to
> isoglosses and, say, to refer to Low German dialects as "Dutch" and
> to create an atmosphere of territorial claims, then problems would
> arise. Such things depend on definitions. If one would define a
> linguistic boundary between "Dutch" and "German" coinciding with,
> say, the High German Lautverschiebung, then suddenly Holland would
> become entitled to vast areas in the north (and Germany to part of
> Limburg).
Then how about vice-versa: to any German, Plattdeutsch
(that's the vernacular for Niederdeutsch/Low German) is
also Deutsch (i.e. Moin-Moin in Hamburg or Moin in Munich is
perceived to be the same despite 1,000 years of "Kleinstaaterei,"
which is much more than federalism)? By this token, Flanders,
The Netherlands cum Danmaerk, Sweden, Norway & Island are also
Deutschland. And don't we forget... UK, USA, Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, Namibia and South Africa. :-)
> Contrary to what is sometimes thought Dutch and German are not
> mutually comprehensible or easily learned, except by people
> especially interested in language.
Quite a curious phenomenon (that I, for a certain period of time,
saw myself years ago at in areas near Venlo and Aachen): local
Germans, whose Plattdeutsch kind of dialects are pretty close
to the neighboring dialects beyond the border by and large don't
try mumbling anything in a common Low Dutch/Deutsch (unlike
Slavs such as Czechs, Slovaks, Poles), whereas virtually every
or every second Dutchman or Vlaamser from Belgium and Luxemburg
is able to speak German.
> Acquiring even a modest reading
> knowledge in German (learning how to read a newspaper with the help
> of a dictionary, e.g.) takes a lot of work, never mind actually
> speaking it in a way that can be understood.
Yeah, but OTOH, anyone in good command of German (even someone
who has no idea of the elementary Plattdeutsch rules, such as
<ik, wat, dat, ete, make, ut dem hus, janz, jestern, to, he...>),
is able to understand a lot reading a Dutch text (listening,
agreed, is a bit more difficult). A lot if we compare with
Danish, Swedish and Norwegian texts. Flemish/Dutch is almost
as intelligible as Schwizer Düütsch, Jiddisch and Transylvanian
"Saxon" (which is actually Rheinfränkisch, i.e. close to
Mosel & Luxemburg German).
> Nowadays Dutch school children regard German as a difficult exotic
> language.
I can't believe that. To me, Dutch seems to be difficult &
... schwere Spraak. :-)
*
Which of these do you perceive closer to Dutch? -> Letzelburgisch
Deutsch (Luxemburg German) or the Plattdeutsch spoken, say, in
the Oche-Kölle-Düsseldorf or in Münsterland regions. (The Rhineland
Platt is separated from the Münster Platt by the Ruhr Basin; I
mean linguistically, although Ruhr people also have some features
belonging to the 1st Lautverschiebung and are located North of the
line Aachen-Köln-Berlin-Königsberg (Kaliningrad), i.e. the border
Low German-Middle German.)
And finally, I reiterate my question (from a strict linguistical
and... psychological point of vies): taking into consideration
that Dutch is so much closer to German dialects than the rest of
the Germanic idioms, would it be perceived as false or gross
exageration if one said Dutch is actually sort of a German
dialect? (Here, it is necessary to forget for a moment the
recent sad history & memory that prompt the Dutchman shout
to a German "Gib mir mein Fahrrad [bicycle] zurück!" So, only the
linguistic viewpoint.)
> Willem
George
PS: A propos politics & history: many years ago I was a tourist
with a group of friends in Luxemburg. A mixed group: lads & gals
from Romania and Poland. In a hotel, where we (i.e. some of us;
me & other 2 slept in a Ford Transit :-)) in the end could sleep,
the personnel wouldn't speak German. It was me who negotiated
everything in *English* with the daughter of the owner of the house.
But the other day, as those people realised that we weren't
Germans despite our passports, esp. since our language, when
communicating with one another was Romanian or Polish (and German
only between the Romanians and Poles), those Vlaams people all
of a sudden could speak a (nearly) perfect German, with
idiosyncrasies that resembled those in the neighboring Rheinland.
Moreover, their own Dutch-like idiom was strikingly close to
the Rhineland Platt. [I cannot say now whether they spoke Flemish
or Letzelburger Deutsch.] The very same evening, after the
conversation in English, the owner of the hotel issued a few
orders to a subordinate, a guy called... Hans, and their idiom
sounded in such a striking way that we, the guests, at once
understood that those people could also speak German. But we
understood afterwards why the fuss: the population over there
still resented Teutonic deeds during two world wars (esp. WW2).