LL-L: "Phonology" (was "Anglo-Frisian") LOWLANDS-L, 19.NOV.2000 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
  L O W L A N D S - L * 19.NOV.2000 (01) * 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>
  Archive: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html>
  =======================================================================
  A=Afrikaans, Ap=Appalachean, D=Dutch, E=English, F=Frisian, L=Limburgish
  LS=Low Saxon (Low German), S=Scots, Sh=Shetlandic, Z=Zeelandic (Zeeuws)
  =======================================================================

From: Ethan Barrett [barrett at kitcarson.net]
Subject: LL-L: "Anglo-Frisian" LOWLANDS-L, 18.NOV.2000 (02) [E]

>I recall hearing that in one North Frisian dialect, Germanic þ
>showed up as _s_ after WWII.  The thought was that this
>community had maintained þ through 1945 (unlikely but not
>impossible), but then when German refugees flooded into the
>island (or mainland village?), the closest they could come to þ
>was [s], which replaced þ.   Can anyone comment on if that
>actually happened as I heard it?

Very interesting!  I had thought that the Middle English 'ye' had been
derived from the Old English 'ge' , as in 'ge sindon' = 'you are', in which

the g was pronounced as a y.

Ethan Barrett

----------

From: Stefan Israel [stefansfeder at yahoo.com]
Subject: "Anglo-Frisian"

Reinhard/Ron wrote, on the topic of spirant d in Jutland
pronunciation:

> Steven T. Lasswell [...] goes on to explain that a similar
shift to [r] occurred in the case of
> /d/.  This is also a frequent occurrence in certain Low Saxon
(Low German)
> dialects; e.g., _Bedden_ ~ _Berr(e)n_ 'beds', _Vadder_ ~
_Varrer_ 'father'.

> I wonder if the occurrence of /ð/ and its assumedly recent
realization as
> [l] in Sylt North Frisian is somehow connected with the
intervocalic and
> coda realization of what is written as _d_ as a very lax [ð]
in Danish and
> Southern Jutish

It's not surprising that Danish  [ð] sounds like [l]: l is
essentially a [d] with air escaping around the sides of the
tongue (thus l is called a lateral).  If the tongue does not cut
off airflow on the sides when forming [ð], you indeed get a
lateral, l-like [ð].
And as you say, this feature seems to be shared in Jutland, in
both Frisian and Danish and Platt.  I have noticed my relatives
from Lütjenweststedt (central Holstein) sporadically but often
pronounce /d/ as [ð] intervocalicly.  I believe you'll get the
alternation <dd>~<ll> at times in Holstein (e.g. Wedder ~
Weller, if memory serves me right).

> Sylt Frisian (Sölring) where there is a phoneme that is
written either
> > as _ð_ or as a barred _d_ (e.g., _faðer_ 'father', _bröðer_
> 'brother')?
[...]
> It was neither [j] nor [z], but [r] and [l] besides [ð].

[j] came into play in Middle Low German (and related
languages?), where intervocalic /d/ often softened to [j], you
may be thinking of that:

Duke Friedrich Ulrich (1579-1634) burst into Platt during a
dispute with Hannover over the city woods Eilenriede in 1614:
"Latet den Börgern öre Eilerie!".
More notably this happened in consonant clusters:
   binden > binnjen > binnen,   wilde > willje > wille

The occasional Platt writer specifically wrote the <j> during
the transition period, which lets us know that /d/ did become
/j/ before being lost.

It would be tempting to suggest that the [ð] pronunciation
continued unbroken in Platt, and that this [ð] led to the [j]
and later [l] pronunciations, but Dutch weakens that argument.
Dutch sporadically softens /d/ to [j] as well:  rode/roje,
rijden/rije   goede/goeje.
This softening can happen to [d] and doesn't require [ð], as
shown by the fact that Dutch /d/ is [d] and not [ð].

There's a temptation to think that [ð] survived colloquially all
the way in Platt from Old Saxon times, but since this softening
of /d/ happens to d's that were clearly stops in Old Saxon (e.g.
wilde, not “wilthe”, bindan, not “binthan”, this softening would
appear to be an independent later development that
coincidentally restored the dental spirant.  After all, lenition
of /d/ to [ð] is not uncommon in languages of the world.
Some varieties of Frisian might well have retained the dental
spirant the entire time, rather than re-inventing it, of course.
 Frisian on the whole was high-germanized much less than Platt,
and has lost many fewer of the old North Sea Germanic
characteristics.

In any event, it looks like a tendency to soften the
articulation of /d/ medially was widespread in a large stretch
of Lowland territory, presumably stretching back some centuries.

Stefan Israel
stefansfeder at yahoo.com

----------

From: R. F. Hahn [sassisch at yahoo.com]
Subject: Anglo-Frisian

Stefan Israel wrote:

> It's not surprising that Danish  [ð] sounds like [l]: l is
> essentially a [d] with air escaping around the sides of the
> tongue (thus l is called a lateral).  If the tongue does not cut
> off airflow on the sides when forming [ð], you indeed get a
> lateral, l-like [ð].

That is interesting.  My theory had been that this isn't a real [ð] but a
"lax" continuant that shares all features with [ð] except that it does not
have actual friction.  (Say _th_ as in _bother_ but don't touch your teeth
with the tongue.)  The result is some type of "liquid".  German speakers
who are not familiar with it tend to identify it as the nearest familiar
thing: [l].

> I have noticed my relatives
> from Lütjenweststedt (central Holstein) sporadically but often
> pronounce /d/ as [ð] intervocalicly.  I believe you'll get the
> alternation <dd>~<ll> at times in Holstein (e.g. Wedder ~
> Weller, if memory serves me right).

Yes, indeed.  This is common dialectal variation; e.g., _wedder_ ~ _werrer_
~ _weller_ ~ _weer_ 'again'.

> [j] came into play in Middle Low German (and related
> languages?), where intervocalic /d/ often softened to [j], you
> may be thinking of that:

> More notably this happened in consonant clusters:
>    binden > binnjen > binnen,   wilde > willje > wille

Yes, this is very common in the easternmost dialects, most of them now
extinct, though there is still one relatively strong surviving
representative dialect group: Mennonite Low Saxon/Low German
("Plautdietsch").

> It would be tempting to suggest that the [ð] pronunciation
> continued unbroken in Platt, and that this [ð] led to the [j]
> and later [l] pronunciations, but Dutch weakens that argument.
> Dutch sporadically softens /d/ to [j] as well:  rode/roje,
> rijden/rije   goede/goeje.
> This softening can happen to [d] and doesn't require [ð], as
> shown by the fact that Dutch /d/ is [d] and not [ð].

And the next step seems to be deletion.  Evidence of this is found in both
Low Saxon/Low German and Dutch.  In the former it happens in certain
dialects intervocalically or where there is superlength before /d/; e.g.,
'poeple', 'folks': Old Saxon _liudi_ > Modern Low Saxon _Lüde_ ['ly:de]  ~
_Lüe_ ['ly:(j)e]  ~ _löe_ [l{oe}(j)@] ~ _Lüüd'_ [ly:.d] ~ _Lü_ [ly:.]; cf.
Standard Dutch _lui_.

> In any event, it looks like a tendency to soften the
> articulation of /d/ medially was widespread in a large stretch
> of Lowland territory, presumably stretching back some centuries.

Yes, it seems to be an areal feature.  If I am not mistaken, deletion of
/d/ also occurs in Southern Jutish dialects.  I wonder if this has
something to do with a general tendency toward vowel "softening."  Note
that in some Low Saxon dialects, especially the westernmost ones, there is
virtually no aspiration of voiceless stops.  In all or most other dialects
(and also in the Low-Saxon-influenced Missingsch varieties of German),
aspiration occurs only word-initially, while in Standard German and similar
varieties there is intervocalic aspiration (e.g., _Kette_ ['k`Et`@]
'chain'); e.g., _Tater_ ['t`Q:tA] 'Rom', 'Gypsy', _Poppen_ ['p`Op=m]
'dolls', _beter_ ['be:tA] 'better'.  In some dialects, intervocalic
unaspirated voiceless stops then turn into voiced ones; e.g., _Tater_
['t`Q:dA] 'Rom', 'Gypsy', _Poppen_ ['p`Ob=m] 'dolls', _beter_ ['be:dA]
'better'.  "Genuine" /d/ then may or may not be deleted; e.g., _wed(d)er_ ~
_weer_ 'again'.

Rergards,
Reinhard/Ron

==================================END===================================
  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>.
  =======================================================================
  * 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
  =====================================================================