LL-L "Phonology" 2005.02.02 (07) [E]
Lowlands-L
lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
Thu Feb 3 00:15:28 UTC 2005
======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 02.FEB.2005 (07) * 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: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at worldonline.nl>
Subject: phonology
As you may know, I'm only a passive member of this list since a few months,
after a quite active period, and since I just take a look in the archives to
follow some of the discussions. But now I have to react, because Low Saxon
phonology has always had my special interest.
I couldn't find where the 'daal' discussion started but I saw Kenneth and
Ron "quarreling" about it.
What Kenneth says about the distinction between [a:] and [å:]/[Q:] is
absolutely true for all Low Saxon varieties in the Netherland, except for
that of the North, i e province of Groningen and the Northern and North
Eastern parts of the province of Drenthe. The latter have [å:]/[Q:]/[O:]
from both Old Western Germanic lengthend short /a/ and long /aa/ -/æ:/. But
in the provinces of Gelderland and Overijssel, the Southern half of Drenthe
and the Stellingwerven Region in the province of Friesland old long /aa/
is /å:]/[Q:] everywhere, and lengthend old short /a/ became /a:/, except for
the Stellingwerven which has /E:/.
In Germany, as Kenneth stated, the same is true for Westphalia. Therefor
[a:] and [Q:] must be distinguished in their orthography in these dialects.
But this 'new' long [a:] is differentiated from short [a] too, so this
should be clear in the spelling system as well...
For German Low Saxons this may seem strange, because the vast majority of
Northern Germany has kept only one phoneme [Q:] and it is one of the
characteristics for them of Low Saxon. They like to write 'aa' and pronounce
that as [Q:].
In the Netherlands it's the other way around: here the distinction betwen
[a:] and [Q:] is normal for the majority of Low Saxon speakers, and to us it
feels hyperdialectic to change every Dutch 'aa' to 'ao'...
Interestingly for English speakers, their language has a similar
distinction:
in English, this old long /aa/-/æ:/ is usually 'ee'
LS: slaopen, schaop, daod E: sleep, sheep, deed etc
but sometimes English has o/oo
LS: maone, gaon, spaon E: moon, go, spoon etc
the lengthened /a/ has usually /a~e] as its counterpart in English
LS: maken, aap, raaf E: make, ape, raven etc
'A' is not the only vowel with this kind of historically based distinction
in Low Saxon.
For instance many LS dialects in the Netherlands have ee [e:] from old long
e and/or from old ei, but also ae/èè [E:] from old short e.
Lèven [lE:b=m] 'to live/life' vs 'teken' [te:k=N] 'sign (token)' etc.
èten/aeten [E:t=n] 'to eat' vs 'benen' [be:n:] 'leg (bone)' etc.
In many Northern German LS varieties these distinctions are absent or at
least different.
Same goes for old long o [o:] and old short o lengthened to oa/òò [O:], and
for two ö varieties.
BTW in the Netherlands this kind of differentiations are not only typical
for most Low Saxon varieties, but also for many (Eastern) Low Franconian
ones in the South,
i.e. in Brabant and Limburg.
Well, that is what I wanted to say about it now,
Ingmar Roerdinkholder
----------
From: R. F. Hahn sassisch at yahoo.com
Subject: Phonology
Thanks a lot for elucidating this, Ingmar. Much appreciated.
By the way, my buddy Kenneth and I wouldn't quarrel, not even in quotation
marks. We like discussing about these things in an exploratory way, but we
know we are basically on the same page and are both willing to concede, and
I dare say this about Henry Pijffers as well. It's not a matter of
"standing one's ground" but of getting to the truth together. Opening each
other's eyes to the true extent of diversity and thus getting a more
accurate big picture is what all this is about. Thanks for contributing to
that.
> the lengthened /a/ has usually /a~e] as its counterpart in English
> LS: maken, aap, raaf E: make, ape, raven etc
This would partly answer my question if this [a:] can occur before
non-liquids and non-nasals as well. The answer seems to be "yes." So we do
indeed have two distinct long phonemes: /aa/ and /åå/. This is important to
know. Based on the assumption that this is the case I have proposed (and
have begun using) an orthographic distinction between <aa> and <ao> specific
to this type of dialect in the Algemeyne Schryvwys' (AS). Writing <ao> in
dialects that do not have this phonemic distinction would be superfluous and
indeed interfering.
> For instance many LS dialects in the Netherlands have ee [e:] from old
long e and/or
> from old ei, but also ae/èè [E:] from old short e.
> Lèven [lE:b=m] 'to live/life' vs 'teken' [te:k=N] 'sign (token)' etc.
> èten/aeten [E:t=n] 'to eat' vs 'benen' [be:n:] 'leg (bone)' etc.
>
> In many Northern German LS varieties these distinctions are absent or at
least
> different.
I don't feel that it's absent or different. There may be individual words
in which it is phonemically different, but otherwise the differences are
merely phonetic, not phonemic (which is to be expected in cross-dialectical
contexts).
General North Saxon of Germany:
leven (Leven ~ Läven ~ Leben ~ Läben) ["lE:v=m] ~["lE:b=m] 'life'
leven (leven ~ läven ~ leben ~ läben) ["lE:v=m] ~["lE:b=m] 'to live'
leyven (leven ~ leben) ["le.Iv=m] ~["le.Ib=m] ~ ["la.Iv=m] ~["la.Ib=m] 'to
love'
leyven (leven ~ leben ~ leiven ~ leiben) ["le.Iv=m] ~ ["le.Ib=m] ~
["la.Iv=m] ~ ["la.Ib=m] 'dear/beloved (ones)'
teken (T(h)eken ~ T(h)äken) ["tE:k=N] 'counters'
teyken (Teken ~ Teiken) ["te.Ik=N] ~ ["ta.Ik=N] 'sign (token)' etc.
eten (eten ~ äten) [E:t=n] 'to eat'
beynen (Been(en) ~ Bein(en)) [be.In:] ~ [ba.In:] 'legs'
As you can see, the only difference is that your [e:] is a diphthong ([e.I]
~ [E.I]) in our dialects. The distinctions are basically the same.
Orthographically, this poses the question if a standardization compromise is
needed or if orthographic differences be allowed. For now I tend toward the
latter.
NL: lèven ~ laeven vs leven
D: leven vs leyven
Even if the orthographic differences (i.e., a difference in the choice of
*devices*, not a phonemic difference) I can't see that this would cause a
lot of problems to readers. If one or the other device were chosen, then
the writer and the reader would soon learn:
Solution 1:
ae = NL [E:] vs D [e:] ~ [E:]
ee = NL [e:] vs D [e.I] ~ [E.I]
Solution2:
ee = NL [E:] vs D [e:] ~ [E:]
ey = NL [e:] vs D [e.I] ~ [E.I]
Where in North Saxon and in your area there are monophthong [E:] (~ [e:])
some dialects, especially of the Westphalian and Eastphalian rages have
falling diphthongs; e.g., [liE:b=m] 'to live' (vs [la.Ib=m] 'to love').
Writing the usual _liäben_ for the latter is merely a
dialect-(group-)specific device contributing to unnecessary orthographic
diversity.
> Same goes for old long o [o:] and old short o lengthened to oa/òò [O:],
and for
> two ö varieties.
Ditto in Germany (though some dialects, especially many of the Lower Elbe
region, have lost the distinction /oo/ vs /ou/, probably because they made
/aa/ [o:]):
stroom (Stroom) [stro:m] ~ [strO:m] 'stream', 'river'
door (Door) [do:V] ~ [dO:V] 'gate', 'portal'
kroon (Kroon) [kro:n] ~ [krO:n] 'crown'
hoog (hooch) [ho:x] ~ [hO:x] 'high'
ook (ok) [o:k] ~ [O:k] 'also', 'as well'
gous (Goos ~ Gaus) [go.Us] ~ [ga.Us] 'goose'
vout (Foot ~ Faut) [fo.Ut] ~ [fa.Ut] 'foot'
hout (Hoot ~ Haut) [ho.Ut] ~ [ha.Ut] 'hat'
boum (Boom ~ Baum) [bo.Um] ~ [ba.Um] 'tree'
our (Ohr ~ Uhr) [?o.UV] ~ [?u:V] 'ear'
(In Lower Elbe dialects all of the above uniformly have a diphthong: [o.U],
[e.U] or [a.U].)
boen (Böön ~ Boen) [bø:n] ~ [b9:n] 'attic'
stoen (Stöön ~ Stoen) [stø:n] ~ [st9:n] 'support'
hoeger (höger ~ hoeger) ["hø:gV] ~ ["h9:gV] 'higher'
doer (Döör ~ Doer) [dø:V] ~ [d9:V] 'door'
kloetern (klötern ~ kloetern) ["klø:tVn] ~ ["kl9:tVn] 'to rattle'
goys' (Göös ~ Geus ~ Gäus) [g9.Is] ~ [gO.Is] 'geese'
boym (Bööm ~ Beum ~ Bäum) [b9.Im] ~ [bO.Im] 'trees'
hoyt (Hööm ~ Heut ~ Häut) [h9.It] ~ [hO.It] 'hats'
voyt (Fööt ~ Feut ~ Fäut) [f9.It] ~ [fO.It] 'feet'
koyr (Köör ~ Keur ~ Käuer ~ Küür) [k9.IV] ~ [kO.IV] ~ [ky:V] 'choice'
Again, there are dialects that have falling diphthongs where the above have
monophthongs and tend to be written as such; e.g., _huog_ 'high' and
_hüöger_ 'higher'. But again, this is merely a dialect-(group-)specific
device contributing to unnecessary orthographic diversity. As far as I am
concerned, it's of interest mostly to linguists, and they have access to IPA
and SAMPA for those specific purposes (he says crossing over into
"Orthography").
Kumpelmenten,
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.
=======================================================================
More information about the LOWLANDS-L
mailing list