LL-L: "Phonology" LOWLANDS-L, 16.NOV.1999 (04) [E]

[Lowlands-L Administrator]

 ========================================================================
 L O W L A N D S - L * 16.NOV.1999 (04) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
 Posting Address: <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>
 Web Site: <http://www.geocities.com/~sassisch/rhahn//lowlands/>
 User's Manual: <http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html>
 =========================================================================
 A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
 LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic
 =========================================================================
 You have received this because your account has been subscribed upon
 request. To unsubscribe, please send the command "signoff lowlands-l"
 as message text from the same account to
 <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or sign off at
 <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 =========================================================================

From: john feather [johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk]
Subject:  Phonology

Carl Johan Petersson wrote:

>When I started learning Dutch, I was told by my teacher that Swedish /v/
and Dutch /w/ are virtually identical. As far as I know, Dutchmen studying
Swedish are taught the same (I know this is the case with those studying
Swedish at Groningen University anyway).

>The Dutch /v/, however, is often difficult for Swedish learners, since it
has no equivalent in our language. The advice I got was to pronounce it as
a somewhat "softened" /f/. <

I, on the other hand, can't remember being told that Swedish "v" presented
any problem for English speakers, while Dutch "w" does. This seems to
suggest a steady gradation from English to Swedish to Dutch.

As regards Dutch "v" I have not been convinced by the previous attempts to
describe it, and for me it's a softened /v/ rather than a softened /f/. It
seems to me that the essence of it is that it starts unvoiced and ends
voiced, ie something like English "f" gliding to "v". I found support for
this in Shetter's "Introduction to Dutch" where he writes for "v":
"Resembles Eng. "v" except that the voicing does not begin immediately; it
thus stands between Eng. "v" and Dutch "f"." You get the sound (I think) if
you put your teeth and lips in the position to say Eng "f" and then (without
forcing it) say "v".

John Feather johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

==================================END======================================
 * Please submit contributions to <lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org>.
 * Contributions will be displayed unedited in digest form.
 * Please display only the relevant parts of quotes in your replies.
 * Commands for automated functions (including "signoff lowlands-l") are
   to be sent to <listserv at listserv.linguistlist.org> or at
   <http://linguistlist.org/subscribing/sub-lowlands-l.html>.
 * Please use only Plain Text format, not Rich Text (HTML) or any other
   type of format, in your submissions
 =========================================================================