LL-L "Phonology" 2003.04.24 (02) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 24.APR.2003 (02) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * sassisch at yahoo.com
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/rules.htm
Posting Address: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
=======================================================================
You have received this because you have 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.
=======================================================================
A=Afrikaans Ap=Appalachian B=Brabantish D=Dutch E=English F=Frisian
L=Limburgish LS=Lowlands Saxon (Low German) N=Northumbrian
S=Scots Sh=Shetlandic V=(West)Flemish Z=Zeelandic (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: "Gary Taylor" <gary_taylor_98 at yahoo.com>
Subject: Phonetics

Hi all

I have a question regarding the pronunciation of l
when it occurs after a vowel and before a consonant or
a pause in Lowlands languages. In Standard British
English, l has two distinct pronunciations
(allophones). When it occurs in the position mentioned
above it is a 'dark-l' (velarised), otherwise it's a
'clear-l'. In North American and Australian Englishes
the l tends to be (slightly) dark in all positions,
whereas in North England, Ireland (and I'm presuming
Scots - although I'm not sure - I'd like confirmation)
l tends to be clear in all positions. Does anyone know
of a map which shows the areas of Britain where l is
clear in all positions?

My main interest is the spread of vocalic l, ie.
pronunciations of l as something like a 'u'. I'm
guessing that the spread in England will only be in
areas where l is pronounced dark. If anyone can
contradict me here I'd be very interested. I'd also be
interested in phonetic descriptions of l in Dutch,
Frisian and Low Saxon where various vocalisations
sometimes occur, to u in the first two and to i in the
latter. I'd greatly appreciate any input.

Thanks in advance

Gary

----------

From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
Subject: Phonology

Hi, Gary, Lowlanders!

This topic of l-vocalization interests me a great deal too, as some
Lowlanders already know.  So I am very keen on the input you (and I)
will hopefully receive on this.

Below are some relevant bits of information (observations) in brief.

I hear many North Americans pronounce /l/ as [w] (effectively "delete"
it) between <o> and a syllable-final consonant; e.g., <gold> -> gowd (as
though writte <goad>), <bold> -> bowd (as though written <bode>),
<foals> -> fowz (as though written <foes>).  I believe that this is
accepted enough to consider it within the range of Standard American
English.  I hear some people apply this rule after other back vowels;
e.g., <falls> -> fawz (as though written <faws>).  This, too, may be
considered within standard by many.  I am not so sure about the
acceptability of the rule (l -> w) applying after a high back round
vowel, which I also hear occasionally; e.g., <full> -> fuw, <fool> ->
foo(w), <cool> -> coo(w), <rules> -> rooz.  I hear some people apply the
rule after front vowels (e.g., <fill> -> fiw, <milk> -> miwk), but I
think this is considered sub-standard.

Of course, l-"deletion" is standard before /m/ in cases such as <calm>
-> caam, <salmon> -> sammon (unlike the Austrian TV cook Wolfgang Puck
who still hasn't figured out that it is not sahl-monn), and <Holmes> ->
Homes (analogically extended to <Stockholm> -> Stockhome).  I hear some
people extend this; e.g., <film> -> fiwm, <helm> -> hewm.

As we discussed a while back, most Dutch varieties have a velar (i.e.,
not tongue-tip) /l/, as in <hell> in most English varieties.  In many
cases this calls for schwa epenthesis and thus creates an additional
syllable in which the /l/ comes to be initial; e.g., <melk> -> mellek
['mEl at k] 'milk'.  This is a productive rule.  A rule that used to apply
at a fairly early stage (early enough to have been inherited by
Afrikaans) is l-vocalization between /o/ and a syllable-final consonant,
and this is reflected orthographically; e.g., _old_ > <oud> 'old',
_gold_ > <goud> 'gold', _wold_ > <woud> 'woods', _holt_ > <hout>,
_Wolter_ > <Wouter> 'Walter', _stolt_ > <stout> 'fearless', 'audacious',
_zolt_ > <zout> 'salt', _holden_ > <houden> 'to hold', _scholder_ >
<schouder> 'shoulder' -- thus this historical shift (taking into
consideration modern standard pronunciation): ol > ou > au

Most Lowlands Saxon (Low German) varieties used to have two /l/
allophones: alveodental (as in German) as syllable onset, and velar
syllable-finally.  However, the latter is fast fading away, can be heard
only in the speech of true, elderly native speakers.  I am not aware of
vocalization of velar /l/, though there may well be varieties that have
it.  (LS equivalents of the Dutch words above: _o(o)ld_, _Gold_ ~
_Guld_, _Wo(o)ld_, _Holt_ ~ Hult_, _Wolter_ ~ _Walter_, _stolt_ ~
_stult_ 'proud', _Solt_ ~ _Sult_.)  If such a rule does apply, I would
be grateful for that information.  Some speakers vocalize /l/ before
syllable-final /k/ and /g/ (rather than use an epenthetic schwa as in
Dutch); e.g., _Melk_ [mEIk] ~ _Milk_ [mIik] ~ [mI:k] 'milk', _Telg'_
[t_hE.Ij] 'twig'.  This latter rule has been adopted in various forms of
Missingsch (i.e., German dialects on LS substrates), e.g., _Milch_
[mIiC] 'milk'.

Like Gary, I would love to find out more about the spread of these and
related rules.

Regards,
Reinhard/Ron

================================END===================================
* Please submit postings to lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org.
* Postings 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.
=======================================================================