Talk:Northern Low Saxon

[Untitled]

According to Low Saxon language (and de:Niedersächsische Sprache, which it was based on), Hamburger is a Northern Low Saxon dialect. This page implies otherwise. Is it? -- Toby 18:27 Feb 4, 2003 (UTC)

Hamburger is a variant of Northern Low Saxon, like Holsteiner or Schleswiger. There only are marginal differents.

Requested move of "Northern Low Saxon language" to "Northern Low Saxon"

This variety's name is unique (have a look at the pages that link there), so according to the naming guideline, there is no need for the "language" suffix. Additionally, removing the "language" suffix has the advantage of being NPOV with regard to the question whether this is an independent language or not — and of putting an end to the ridiculous current situation of a lemma called XXX language being defined as a dialect in the first sentence of the article. ― j. 'mach' wust | ✑ 20:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting

• Support. ― j. 'mach' wust | ✑ 20:45, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
• Support. LuiKhuntek 23:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Result

Moved. WhiteNight ^{T | @ | C} 21:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Introduction

The whole introduction has to be rewritten, mainly because of reasons of neutrality:

• northern low Saxon is not a Standard Low German (since such thing does not exist)
• is not spoken and understood in a huge central area since

a) the majority of the population of the listed states does not use these dialect anymore; b) these are the northern parts of western Low German and not a huge central area

• Eastphalian and Westphalian are are not border regions but rather separate dialect regions--Zarbi1 (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Understandable to most speakers

Fact is that any variant of Low German is intelligible to most speakers of Low German and the western dialects cannot be considered Low German standard only by that means. East of Holstein radio and TV broadcasts are made in the local dialects. The impression of some "standard" Low German comes from two things: 1. The western dialects have much in common in spelling/pronunciation and vocabulary. 2. In the west there is a greater mass of Low German broadcasts and speakers. Thus the received wider acceptance.193.174.122.76 (talk) 12:25, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, exactly for that it is considered to be the "closest to a standard". --::Slomox:: >< 19:08, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

I see, makes sense. The point in deleting the parts in question was to avoid the misconception that there was some sort of agreement amongst the population or broadcasting stations that this dialect was close-to-standard or that other dialects would be less intelligible.193.174.122.76 (talk) 19:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)