LL-L "Phonology" 2005.03.08 (10) [E]

Tue Mar 8 23:05:57 UTC 2005

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 08.MAR.2005 (10) * 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
Commands ("signoff lowlands-l" etc.): listserv at listserv.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: LL-L "Onomastica" 2005.03.08 (05) [E]

The same development as in E. gh > [f] took place in West Flemish and
French Flemish: e.g. enoef [@"nuf] = D. genoeg = E. enough.

Btw in Sranan Tongo we find f for E. th as well: e.g. mofo = mouth.

I think in Danish -g > -v is quite normal too.
A somewhat stranger Danish soundshift to me is that of -t > -d > -dh > L.
E.g. støt > stød > sdø?dh > sdø?L = punch/push/gust, and the name for the
special interesting Danish tonal accent.
But in Danish there has been such an enormous chain of soundshifts that
entirely changed the language's character compared to the other Scandi-
navian languages. My own theory is in fact that these changes started
outside Denmark, in Northern Low Saxon, with the devoicing of intervocal
stops -p-, -k-, -t- > -b-, -g-, -d-. In Groningen Low Saxon we see the
same tendency. Further developments in Danish were then: -b- > -bh-,
-g- > gh-, -d- > -dh- etc etc

Ingmar

R. F. Hahn :
>  Loss of fricatives and their replacement by surviving fricatives is not
>all
>  that unusual, especially in English and in Celtic. There is the
>  better-known case of the loss of English /G/ (written <gh>) and its
>  replacement by means of /v/ -> [f], as in "laugh". Then, still occurring
>in
>  more recent times, there is dialectal or idiolectal replacement of /T/
by
>  /f/ and /D/ by /v/ (e.g., "both" as "bofe", "the" as "ve", "rather" as
>  "rahver", and "through" as "frough").
>There's a more modern example of this too. Take the pronunciation by some
>English speakers of a famous Dutch painter who cut off his ear: [væn goT].
>That is, of course, no explanation for the pronunciation here in the
States:
>[væn go]. :-)

----------

From: heather rendall <HeatherRendall at compuserve.com>
Subject: LL-L "Onomastica" 2005.03.07 (08) [E]

Message text written by INTERNET:lowlands-l at LOWLANDS-L.NET
>Then, still occurring in
more recent times, there is dialectal or idiolectal replacement of /T/ by
/f/ and /D/ by /v/ (e.g., "both" as "bofe", "the" as "ve", "rather" as
"rahver", and "through" as "frough").<

This is now known as Estuary English  i.e. spoken from the East End of
London ( Cockneys) to the Essex coast.

Include here the sound shift of medial 'th' >> v v   e.g. bruvver   muvver
 and also     farver

This dialect has been 'adopted' by some celebrities in order to impress
people with their supposed ordinariness! Chief among these is Nigel Kennedy
the violinist.

Heather

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Onomastica" 2005.03.08 (05) [E]

Ron wrote:
"What comes to mind in Celtic is that in Irish and Scottish Gaelic written
/dh/ is pronounced [G] (the fricative equivalent of /g/), identically to
what is written /gh/. Both are cases of Celtic mutation."

You can usually tell a learner of Irish because they pronounce /dh/ and /gh/
as if normal [g] - i.e., _dhuit_ is pronounced [gitS] - rather than as a
'ghamma' sound. The same process sees /ch/ hypercorrected to [k] even though
most Irish English variants maintain [x].

Incidentally, in the Celtic languages there is also the phenomenon of
sibilant replacement, so that Ir. _srón_ 'nose' has its parallel in W.
_ffroen_.

In Late Cornish and Manx the mutation system broke down to some extent so
that Middle Cornish _melyn_ 'mill' had become Late Cornish _belin_ -
presumably because the speakers had reanalysed _melyn_ as the eclipsed form
of an original *_belin_ or because the mutated form _velin_ was used
habitually in speech in all circumstances, and no one could remember
whether, for writing purposes, the root began with [b] or [m].

Go raibh maith agat,

Criostóir.

----------

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

Heather (above):

> This is now known as Estuary English  i.e. spoken from the East End of
> London ( Cockneys) to the Essex coast.

I've heard it elsewhere as well, for instance in Australia.  There I used to
work with a guy who spoke like that.  At first I thought it was a personal
thing, but then I met his relatives, and they spoke like that also, all of
them born in Australia, somewhere in Victoria.  Later I met someone from New
South Wales who spoke like that.  I asked her if she or her parents came
from England, and she said they had not, that her ancestors had been mostly
Scottish.  What does fascinate me about it is that it seems to occur only in
small pockets, doesn't seem to cover a real area.  I have never heard
Americans speak like that, but I have heard "w" for "r" in the States
("wabbit," "twee," "huwwy," etc., but never *"huwt" or *"ciwcle," then only
"hoyt" and "coycle," as in parts of New York City).

Críostóir (above):

> Incidentally, in the Celtic languages there is also the phenomenon
> of sibilant replacement, so that Ir. _srón_ 'nose' has its parallel in W.
_ffroen_.

I admit that once in a while it crosses my mind that English _gh_ [x] > _f_
is due to a Celtic substrate.  But I usually quickly dismiss it for lack of
evidence.

Besides, it's not as though the alternation between velar/uvular and
labial/labiodental fricatives is confined to Britain.  Consider the
following:

Dutch: lach [...x]
LowSax: lach [...x]
Scots: lauch [...x]
Engl: laugh [...f]

Dutch: genoeg [...x]
LowSax: noug [...x]
WFries: genôch ~ genoch [...x]
Scots: enouch [...x]
Engl: enough [...f]

Dutch: ruw
LowSax: ruug [...x]
Scots: roch [...x]
Engl: rough [...f]

Dutch: taai
LowSax: taag [...x]
Scots: teuch [...x]
Engl: tough [...f]

Dutch: dracht [...xt]
LowSax: dracht [...xt]
Scots: draucht [...xt]
Engl: draught [...ft]
< *drag- 'carry', 'pull', 'draw'

Dutch: gracht [...xt]
Dutch, Middle: graft ~ gracht [...ft] ~ [...xt]
LowSax: graft ~ gracht [...ft] ~ [...xt]
Engl: graft
< *grav- 'dig'

Dutch: lucht [...xt]
LowSax: luft ~ lucht [...ft] ~ [...xt]
WFries: luft ~ lucht [...ft] ~ [...xt]
Scots: laft
Engl: loft

Dutch: zacht [...xt]
LowSax: sacht [...xt]
WFries: sêft
Scots: saft
Engl: soft

Dutch, Middle: nifte ~ nichte [...ft] ~ [...xt]
Saxon, Middle: nifte ~ nichte [...ft] ~ [...xt]
Engl: nift (arch. for 'niece')

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