LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.06 (08) [E

Tue Mar 7 00:38:05 UTC 2006

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 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 (Zeeuws)
=======================================================================

   L O W L A N D S - L * 06 February 2006 * Volume 08
=======================================================================

From: Ian Pollock <ispollock at shaw.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.06 (02) [E]

Dear Ingmar;

> From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
> Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.04 (04) [E]
>
> Thank you, Ian, interesting. So <wh> is called "voiceless w"...
> Does that mean that it is the voiceless counterpart of general w,
> which would be voiced then?
> I always thought that it was pronounced, if at all, as a kind of
> strong <h> followed by <w>.
> If I try to pronounce <w> voiceless, it sounds more or less like fw:
> fwe fwere fwondering fwich fway fwe fwere fwandering fwen fwe fwere
> fwood fwalking

According to IPA, /w/ is a voiced labialized velar approximant and wh
(IPA is an upside-down w) is a voiceless labialized velar approximant.
So yes, they are a voiced/voiceless pair according to IPA. But I think
that you are right in one sense because wh is characterized by far, far
more egressive air flow than /w/. As I recall, my phonetics professor
suggested that a better representation might indeed be h + w
co-articulated. I tend to refer back to IPA for the sake of
universality but we shouldn't forget how inaccurate much of their
classification is, particularly with vowels.
Can anyone speak to the sounds leading historically to English wh and w?
-Ian

----------

From: ANNETTE GIESBRECHT <beautyaround at email.com>
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.06 (02) [E]

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.04 (04) [E]

Thank you, Ian, interesting. So is called "voiceless w"...
Does that mean that it is the voiceless counterpart of general w,
which would be voiced then?
I always thought that it was pronounced, if at all, as a kind of
strong followed by .
If I try to pronounce voiceless, it sounds more or less like fw:
fwe fwere fwondering fwich fway fwe fwere fwandering fwen fwe fwere
fwood fwalking
Ingmar

> From: Ian Pollock
> Dear Ingmar;
> I don't have the knowledge to tell you about all of Anglophonie, but I
> can give you a pretty good picture of Canada. In Canada, voiceless w
> (wh) has almost died a death. Some members of the older generation
> still distinguish it. Schoolteachers often do as well, so everyone
> hears it at school at least and *can* pronounce it if they want.
> However, chances are that if you hear a Canadian-born person below 60
> using it, they're putting on airs. I have heard some people doing this
> and hypercorrecting - a lady once asked me for a cold glass of "whater"
> when I worked in the local ice-cream parlour as a kid.
> I don't know what the situation is in the states, but my impression is
> that it's critically endangered there as well. Too bad, it's rather an
> exotic sound, typologically.
> All the best!
> -Ian Pollock
> From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder
>> I am curious if and how native English speakers still distinguish
>> and in their pronunciation. For me and other Dutchophones
>> they usually sound the same, and I pronounce both as , so I
>> wouldn't tell e.g. whether and weather from each other. But maybe
>> some regional pronos or sociolect still have ('hw')?

----------

From: Brooks, Mark
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.05 (01) [E]

Ingmar wrote: "But maybe some regional pronos or sociolect still have
('hw')?"
Hi Ingmar:
Yes, I make the distinction between weather and whether with the (hw) sound.
I come from Texas and my parents come from Tennessee. There are still some
parts of the South (USA that is) that make the distinction. However, I
believe that is passing away with younger generations. For example, my two
daughters don't make the distinction, and they both were born and raised in
Texas.
Perhaps it is a Scots things, because so much of the Southern US was
populated by Scots, and Scots-Irish.
Mark Brooks

----------

From: Kevin and Cheryl Caldwell
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2006.03.05 (01) [E]

> From: Paul Finlow-Bates
> Subject: LL-L "Literature" 2006.03.04 (01) [E]
>
> From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder
> Subject: LL-L "Literature" 2006.03.03 (07) [E]
>
> ...I am curious if and how native English speakers still distinguish
> and in their pronunciation.
> For me and other Dutchophones they usually sound the same, and I
> pronounce
> both as , so I wouldn't tell e.g. whether and weather from each other.
> But maybe some regional pronos or sociolect still have ('hw')?
>
> Wondering which,
> Ingmar
>
> From Paul Finlow-Bates
>
> suspect less so than in the past. That also seems to be a feature of many
> (but not all) varieties of North American English, and most Irish people I
> know, northern or southern.

I usually differentiate between 'w' and 'wh', unless I get lazy.
It's how I learned it from my parents and in 2nd and 3rd grades in
Tennessee, where the school I attended used a phonics program to
teach reading (this was in the early 1970s). But most Americans I
know pronounce them the same.

Kevin Caldwell

Actually the wh is not voiceless.  It's pronounced like a breathy w. That's 
the way I learned it.  My mother and maternal grandmother were English and 
they learned the Queen's English, and although I live in Canada, I still 
pronounce that way.  .

Annette

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