LL-L "Phonology" 2004.09.30 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 30.SEP.2004 (01) * ISSN 189-5582 * LCSN 96-4226
http://www.lowlands-l.net * lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Rules & Guidelines: http://www.lowlands-l.net/index.php?page=rules
Posting: lowlands-l at listserv.linguistlist.org or lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Server Manual: http://www.lsoft.com/manuals/1.8c/userindex.html
Archives: http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/lowlands-l.html
Encoding: Unicode (UTF-8) [Please switch your view mode to it.]
=======================================================================
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: john feather <johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Phonology

Ingmar, I am fascinated by your discussion with Henry so please continue,
but please remember to add some sub-titles for the rest of us. You wrote:
>there is another strange Randstad thing to confuse final -w (-uw) with "l",
the word nieuws (=news) is frequently pronounced as "niels"<
I assume this is the Dutch dark "l" [ell] and quite close to the sound some
Londoners have in the pronunciation of "wall" and "William" which become
like "waw:" and "Wiw:yam" with the "l" sound merely hinted at. Is that what
you mean?

In Sweden 30 years ago I was told there was a debate about sub-titling with
some people arguing that Swedes _ought_ to be able to understand Danish and
Norwegian speech, irrespective of whether they actually can. The important
question, I imagine, is the proportion of viewers who can't understand or
dislike having to make an effort, and the broadcasters may err on the side
of caution. But I'm a bit doubtful about actors pronouncing carelessly.
Surely they use the accent appropriate to the part. Newsreaders are a
different matter..

John Feather johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

----------

From: john feather <johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Pronunciation

Re that famous Frisian phrase "bûter, brea en griene tsiis". It's similarity
to "butter, bread and green cheese" is supposed to indicate the closeness of
Modern English and Frisian.

According to my Frisian language course, "bûter" is pronounced as it might
be in the North of England;
"brea" like "bray-e" with the second part of the diphthong short; "griene"
like "gree-e-ne" with the second element of the diphthong unemphatic;
"tsiis" as with a German initial "z".

On this basis the two phrases are very different. Can anyone throw any light
on this conundrum?

John Feather CS johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

----------

From: Troy Sagrillo <meshwesh at bigfoot.com>
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2004.09.29 (13) [E]

on 30.09.2004 1.20 AM, Ingmar Roerdinkholder
<ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl> wrote:

> It is even so bad that the Belgium television has to use subtitles for
Dutch
> (Netherland) programmes because otherwise the Flemish don't understand
what is
> said. These subtitles are an exact transcription of the Dutch words
spoken,
> but they are pronounced in a way the Belgiums can't understand them
anymore
> (at least, that is what the Flemish TV must think).

That is not entirely true. This is only the case with programmes involving
actors, esp. when a strongly regional pronunciation is being used (such as
"Baantjer"). Documentaries, news reports, game shows, etc., are not
typically subtitled. And frequently the subtitles do in fact use words
different from what the actors are saying.

What I find strange is that Flemish programmes are often themselves
subtitled in Flanders, especially when the speaker is a real person (as
opposed to an actor) who has even a trace of dialect in his pronunciation or
vocabulary (such as in an interview or documentary, or even news reports).
Often he is using words that are perfectly clear to the vast majority (all?)
of Flemings, but they are not considered AN, so the speaker gets subtitled.
One of the silliest I saw was a man taking about a "fritkot" and this was
subtitled as "frietkraam". I seriously doubt there is a Fleming alive who
doesn't know what a "fritkot" is, and no one in Flanders uses "frietkraam"
at all. Other examples are "je" or "u" for "gij" and "oliebollen" for
"smoutebollen". I can't imagine a Fleming not understanding those either.

(For the non-Dutch speakers in the audience... Imagine US television
programmes shown nation-wide in the USA being subtitled in British English
when the speaker hails from, say, New York or Boston, but is speaking with
perfectly acceptable standard American English with his local accent (i.e.,
no local dialectical vocabulary).)

And in fairness, Flemish programmes (at least those with actors) in the
Netherlands are (always?) subtitled, even when they might not be in
Flanders.

Cheers,

Troy

==============================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.
=======================================================================