Portuguese language changes

[David A. Daniel]

____________________________________________
At 10/7/2009 10:25 AM, Laurence Horn wrote:

>I think we've been down this road before, but
>there is evidently a split between those who call
>all  superposed double-dot diacritics "umlauts"
>whatever their function and those who distinguish
>"true" umlauts (for vowel fronting) as in German
>and Turkish from the superposed double-dots in
>many Romance language orthographies (and English,
>e.g. on the second o in coöperation) that
>indicate diaeresis, i.e. individual pronunciation
>of the vowel on which it occurs as in the
>Portuguese case above.

>That's all I meant, wondering whether the Novo
>Acordo (actually more like a Retrógrado Acordo)
>pact would admit into its vocabulary the
German-derived word "umlaut", and what the " was called in Portuguese.

>Apparently I'm on the road not taken by David A.
>Daniel, and on the other side of the Great
>Divide.  Perhaps I've come down Memory Lane, and
am looking forward to either Veronica or Betty.

Joel

Hmm. I'm not sure how he got into this but, actually, Archie goes up Memory
Lane, rather than down it, to find the fork in the wooded path and, choosing
the left fork, he finds only an uninspiring future. But if your dilemma is
whether the "Acordo", written in Portuguese, calls umlauts umlauts, no, it
doesn't; it calls them "tremas", being written in Portuguese and all. Now,
"trema", in Portuguese and other languages, is used for umlaut and
diaeresis, and we are left with only the choice between Veronica and Betty.
DAD


------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org