<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> </span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">L O W L A N D S - L - 23 October 2007 - Volume 01</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Song Contest: <a href="http://lowlands-l.net/contest/">lowlands-l.net/contest/</a> (- 31 Dec. 2007)</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
=========================================================================</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <
<a href="mailto:ingmar.roerdinkholder@WORLDONLINE.NL">ingmar.roerdinkholder@WORLDONLINE.NL</a>></span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Subject: LL-L "Phonology"
2007.10.22 (05) [E]</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">If I remember correctly, Older Afrikaans and / or certain "coloured"
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">varieties of Afrikaans show something similar to Scots in having</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
diphthonguized î, but unchanged û: 'y' as in St Afr 'y' / Dutch 'ij' in</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">words like 'ys', but 'uu' for St Afr/Dutch 'ui' in words like 'huus',
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">not 'huis'. But I'm sure our SA members can tell us more about this.</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Btw it's not Dutch /ai/ (you wrote: ii > əý ~> aý), but ij = /ei/, and I</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">think it may rather have been (ii > Ii > ei > Ei). In many Eastern</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">dialects of Dutch, and in Low Saxon and Limburgish, 'ij' is still
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">pronounced [Ij].</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
Groeten</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Ingmar</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
R. F. Hahn schreef:</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">This, and various other incursions, is said to explain the presence of</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Norse words in Saxon dialects of the west of England. For example, as</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">someone pointed out on the list recently, the pronunciation of
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">"house/hause" is fairly consistent across dialects from German to</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
English, but in Scots it's "hoose" /hus/ because of Norse influence. In</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Somerset dialects, this is "huish" (such as "Huish Epsicopi" (Bishop's
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">House), near Yeovil, and "Huish Park" (the Yeovil football ground).</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">How do you know it's a case of Norse influence and not simply conservative</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
phonology, i.e. non-participitation in diphthongization that occurred in</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">English?</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">It's similar in Low Saxon and West Flemish versus German and Dutch:</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Scots (uu): *hús* > hoose, t*ún > *toon, *út > oot*</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Saxon (uu): *hûs* > Huus, t*ûn > *Tuun, *ût > uut*
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">W. Flemish (uu > üü): *hûs* > uus, t*ûn > *tuun, *ût > *uut</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">English (uu > au): *hús* > house, t*ún > *town, *út > out*</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">German (uu > au): *hûs* > Haus, z*ûn > *Zaun, *ûz > aus*
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> Dutch (uu > üü > üi > œü): *hûs* > huus > huis, t*ûn > tuun *>* *tuin, *ût</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> uut *>* *uit</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Or are you saying that Scots resisted this particular diphthongization
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">because of Norse influence? (The Nordic languages just never underwent any</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
of those changes.)</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Interestingly, while Saxon and West Flemish resisted all diphthongization,
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Scots did participate in the the diphthongization of /ii/ (the non-rounded</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
counterpart of /uu/), at least to about the stage English was at in Early</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Modern (Elizabethan) English: /ii/ > [əý];
e.g.</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Saxon (ii): *tîd > Tied, b**î > bie, m**în > mien**, l**îna > Lien***
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">W. Flemish (ii): *tîd > tied, b**î > bie, **m**în > mien, **lîne > lien***</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Scots (ii > əý): *tíd* > tide, b*í* > by*, **líne > line*</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
English (ii > *əý > aý): *tíd* > tide, b*í > by**, **líne > line***</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> German (ii > *əý > aý): z*ît > Zeit, b**î > bei, **lîna > Leine*
</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"> Dutch (ii > əý ~> aý): *tîd > tijd, b**î > bij, **lîne > lijn*</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">----------</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
From: </span><span id="_user_ir.j.liek@gmail.com" style="color: rgb(121, 6, 25); font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Jaap Liek <<a href="mailto:ir.j.liek@gmail.com">ir.j.liek@gmail.com</a>></span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2007.10.22 (05) [E]</span><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;" class="q">
> From: R. F. Hahn < <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>> Subject: Phonology<br>><br>> Sandy, I meant to ask you about something you said under
<br>> "Etymology" ...<br>><br>> This, and various other incursions, is said to explain the presence of<br>> Norse words in Saxon dialects of the west of England. For example, as<br>> someone pointed out on the list recently, the pronunciation of
<br>> "house/hause" is fairly consistent across dialects from German to<br>> English, but in Scots it's "hoose" /hus/ because of Norse influence.<br>> In<br>> Somerset dialects, this is "huish" (such as "Huish
<br>> Epsicopi" (Bishop's<br>> House), near Yeovil, and "Huish Park" (the Yeovil football ground).<br>><br>><br>> How do you know it's a case of Norse influence and not simply<br>> conservative phonology,
i.e. non-participitation in diphthongization<br>> that occurred in English?<br>><br>> It's similar in Low Saxon and West Flemish versus German and Dutch:<br>><br>> Scots (uu): hús > hoose, tún > toon, út > oot
<br></span><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> Saxon (uu): hûs > Huus, tûn > Tuun, ût > uut<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> W. Flemish (uu > üü): hûs > uus, tûn > tuun, ût > uut
<br>><br>> English (uu > au): hús > house, tún > town, út > out<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> German (uu > au): hûs > Haus, zûn > Zaun, ûz > aus
<br>> Dutch (uu > üü > üi > œü): hûs > huus > huis, tûn > tuun > tuin, ût ><br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> uut > uit<br>><br>> Or are you saying that Scots resisted this particular diphthongization
<br>> because of Norse influence? (The Nordic languages just never underwent<br>> any of those changes.)<br>><br>> Interestingly, while Saxon and West Flemish resisted all<br>> diphthongization, Scots did participate in the the diphthongization
<br>> of /ii/ (the non-rounded counterpart of /uu/), at least to about the<br>> stage English was at in Early Modern (Elizabethan) English: /ii/ ><br>> [əı]; e.g.<br>><br>> Saxon (ii): tîd > Tied, bî > bie, mîn > mien, lîna > Lien
<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> W. Flemish (ii): tîd > tied, bî > bie, mîn > mien, lîne > lien<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span class="q">><br>> Scots (ii > əı): tíd > tide, bí > by, líne > line<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> English (ii > *əı > aı): tíd > tide, bí > by, líne > line
<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> German (ii > * əı > aı): zît > Zeit, bî > bei, lîna > Leine<br>> Dutch (ii > əı ~> aı): tîd > tijd, bî > bij, lîne > lijn
<br>><br>> Incidentally, what is interesting is that (broad) Australian (and New<br>> Zealand) English is now beginning to undergo another round of this.<br>> What in other English dialects are [uː] (too, soon, boot) and [iː]
<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> (tea, eel, deep) have developed into "slight" diphthongs, something<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span class="q">> like [ʊʉː] ~ [ɤʉː] (too, soon, boot) and [ıiː] ~ [əiː] (tea, eel,<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> deep) respectively, probably something very similar to the diphthongs
<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> English had in words like "house" and "tide" in late Middle English,<br>> just prior to the Early Middle English stage.
<br>><br>> I believe that this is the reason why what in other English dialects<br>> is [aı] (might, bite, p ie) Downunder had to shift to an open [ɑı]<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
> (that to many uninitiated people sounds like "oy") because /ɛı/ (mate,<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> bait, p ay) became [aı] in order to distance itself from /ii/ (->
<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> [ıiː] ~ [əiː], meat, beet, pea) for distinction purposes. At the same<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">
<span class="q">> time, /au/ (l ouse, crown, foul) shifted to [ɜʊ] to distance itself<br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">> from /uu/ (-> [ʊʉː] ~ [ɤʉː], loose, croon, fool). This may have begun
<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="q">> in Cockney and developed farther Downunder.<br>><br>> One sort of shift tends to cause other shifts to become necessary. The
<br>> domino effect?<br>><br>> Regards,<br>> Reinhard/Ron<br><br></span></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;">In 't Zeeuws is aolles 't zelfde as in 't Vlaems (W.Flemish
) baolve<br>lien,ons kenne wel een liene vor een paerd.<br></div><div style="direction: ltr; font-family: arial,sans-serif;"><span class="sg">--<br>Jaap Liek <<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:ir.j.liek@gmail.com">
ir.j.liek@gmail.com</a>><br></span></div><br style="font-family: arial,sans-serif;">