Re: s-stems in Slavic and Germanic

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Andrew Jarrette" <anjarrette@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Nah, I was just over-reacting because I felt you were deflecting
> > > the point I was trying to make: that's a real knife, and that's
> > > real aggression under the cover of Narrenfreiheit. The point was
> > > that this type of strange reactions is the last thing that
> > > disappears after the language, the culture and the last substrate
> > > loans have gone: you see that and you know something old ethnic
> > > is going on under the surface.
>
> >
> > I have trouble understanding you, it seems: to me, it sounds like
> > you are saying that the Dutch language, culture, and substrate
> > loans have gone or are disappearing. Of course that is the opposite
> > of the truth.
>
> Which is one reason I didn't say that. But is there a disappearing
> NWBlock language, culture, and set of substrate loans present? Now,
> that I find interesting.

I think you're reading way too much into those girls' videos. I felt
this from the start but was reluctant to say it; now I feel I must.
There is no way NWBlock can have any influence on those girls' videos
or their funniness. It is just too far in the past. And even if
NWBlock words are present in modern Dutch, modern Dutch is not in
danger of disappearing so those words are not in danger of
disappearing. And the NWBlock culture blended into or disappeared
into Dutch culture long ago, so it would not have any bearing on a
modern Youtube clip or the type of humor some girls put on the
Internet. Unless I am misunderstanding you again, and you mean
something more profound.

>
> > So I can only think then that you mean that their Scottish
> > language, culture, and substrate loans have gone, and their humor
> > represents "something old ethnic" but Scottish. But did they ever
> > have Scottish culture or substrate loans living in the
> > Netherlands? I doubt that in the modern world their Scottish
> > mother would care very much about preserving their Scottish
> > language, culture, and substrate loans, assuming that these would
> > be Gaelic or Lowland Scots, since English nowadays is probably not
> > in such danger. I say this because if she did, she probably would
> > not have married a Dutch man and moved to the Netherlands. And the
> > odds are that she would have been a native (Scottish) English
> > speaker anyway, rather than Gaelic or Lowland Scots.
>
> All this is wonderfully rational thinking. But Joan spoke with a Scots
> accent. You chose (probably not consciously) to disregard it. So did
> your Dutch acquaintance. So did everyone else. I did err on the other
> side by placing too much weight on it, but it *was* a clue about
> reality. I don't blame you or anyone else for doing that, you feel
> secure in the middle of a big language where such small
> ethnically/linguistically related are moribund, at least y'all have
> been able to do that safely in the past.

I didn't exactly disregard it, I just thought she spoke English so
well that she sounded like a native (but I can't believe that a native
Danish speaker can recognize a Scottish accent more readily than I, a
native English speaker. How embarrassing). Or that she was a native,
which possibility I didn't actually discount, it was Mirren who I
couldn't believe had native (Scottish) English in her.

>
> > But maybe I still haven't understood you. I don't know. When I
> > saw these girls I didn't pick up on all the ethnic tragedy that
> > could be beneath their antics, like you did. I just thought they
> > were having fun like girls often like to do (you know, "Girls Just
> > Wanna Have Fun"? OK bad joke), and that's all I was saying by my
> > comments. So there was no intention of deflecting your point, I
> > wasn't really yet aware of it. Any deflection was unintentional,
> > it was partly due to my lack of comprehension of your theory, and
> > because I thought you had already made your point and I could still
> > make a superficial comment.
>
> You got it this time.
>
> > Right now, thinking about your point, I also wonder whether the
> > girls would be aware of what they were doing, if their humor was a
> > coping mechanism for the tragedy in their lives (which tragedy is
> > hard to see just from those Youtube clips), if this is your point.
>
> Tragedy is a strong word; their Learn Dutch videos are poking fun at
> particularly Anglophonic stereotypes of their nationality.

I was aware of that (clogs, eggs, windmills, tulips). I was trying to
make sense of "The point was that this type of strange reactions
[which I took to mean the girls' humor] is the last thing that
disappears after the language, the culture and the last substrate
loans have gone: you see that and you know something old ethnic is
going on under the surface." before I was informed that it referred to
the loss of NWBlock features. So are you saying that their humor or
these stereotypical Dutch attributes are actually relics of NWBlock
culture? Come on, I'm sure they developed long after the NWBlock
speakers had assimilated. Of course you will probably say something
like the NWBlock character never fully died out and manifested itself
later in peculiar humor and stereotypical Dutch attributes. That's
something that's probably impossible to know, but I would doubt it due
to the time scale involved.

>
> > I would think the girls would not be conscious of that, that their
> > expressed intention would be to have some fun, make some jokes,
> > make people laugh, and make people notice them - all not
> > necessarily requiring a special ethnic situation as you have
> > emphasized.
>
> I agree.
>
> > Anyway, I hope you continue to believe that I was not out to ignore
> > you or snub you or "knife" you or anything like that. I'm not that
> > kind of person, I seek to understand, be happy, and make others
> > happy.
> > That's all. I don't try to wound other people.
>
> Part of my annoyance was that I expected you not to get it, not out of
> spite, but because speakers of beg languages tend to paste over little
> clues like that, and that it would be difficult to explain it to you.
> It wasn't.
>

I would think that being not difficult to explain would make you
happier, not give you annoyance. Sorry for making your life easier!
But I wouldn't be so quick to say that I got it, I still think we have
different ideas floating in our minds, bits of which we can recognize
when they are written out, so it sounds like I understand you and
maybe you understand me, but we still have different fundamental
views, I think.

BTW, when I said "I don't want to argue with you" on the thread about
PGmc *g ([G]) in Dutch and elsewhere, I said it because I was afraid
that it would lead to an angry reaction by you ("taking exception")
which I would not be able to defuse. So you can ignore it, I'm
willing to argue with you about anything, I just hope you don't get
piqued. Remember, no insult is ever meant, I do respect your views,
if I don't always understand them or agree with them.

Andrew