LL-L "Phonology" 2004.08.31 (03) [E]

Tue Aug 31 15:32:05 UTC 2004

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 31.AUG.2004 (03) * 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: Ed Alexander <edsells at cogeco.ca>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.08.30 (12) [E]

At 04:29 PM 08/30/04 -0700, Kevin Caldwell wrote:

>Canadian "about" always sounds to me more like "aboat" than "aboot".

I've spent the last few years listening intently for this "Canadian"
marker.  Kevin is right, it does sound "more" like "aboat" than
"aboot".  However, what it mostly sounds like is "ou", pronounced as a pure
diphthong, with both letters sounding something like short "o" and short
"u".  The more typical "American" pronunciation is also a diphthong, but
with the letters long "a" (as in father) and "w" (as in "double or long
u").  However, there is a very wide difference between the way it sounds
from speaker to speaker, though it is always closer to the shorter Canadian
diphthong than it is to the longer American one.

Ed Alexander, Hamilton, Ontaryo, eh?

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.08.30 (12) [E]

Kevin Caldwell wrote:
"Canadian "about" always sounds to me more like "aboat" than "aboot"."

It does to me, too. Only United States scriptwriters hear _aboot_ when they
need a cheap and easy national stereotype, but have managed to popularise
the mis-hearing through sheer repitition.

I think the same goes for the indescribable northern English /u/ which is
habitually written /oo/ by people who should know better. I don't know how
anyone could hear my pronunciation of _bugger_ or _push_ or _pull_ as
"booger", "poosh" and "pool". If anything, they are _bogger_ and _posh_ and
_poll_.

Criostóir.

----------

From: ezinsser at icon.co.za <ezinsser at icon.co.za>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.08.30 (12) [E]

Hi all,

Kevin writes:
> Canadian "about" always sounds to me more like "aboat" than "aboot".

I agree and the more central one goes, the more oat and aboat it becomes.

It's like the Afrikaans vowels /a/ and /e/ and diphtongs ei/y.
The flatter the tongue the more westerly we originate.

Groete,
Elsie Zinsser

----------

From: burgdal32admin <burgdal32 at pandora.be>
Subject: LL-L "Resources" 2004.08.30 (05) [E]

> From: Grietje MENGER <grietje at menger.fsnet.co.uk>
> Subject: LL-L "Resources" 2004.08.25 (05) [E]
>
> All this talk about yae or nae pronouncing the -n in Dutch reminded me
> of a
> neat (I think) resource for learners of Dutch. It's for those who have
> mastered the language as a learner to a good degree of proficience, but
> stumble on coloquialisms or your perennial prepositions. And it's an
> enjoyable read for Dutch speakers too, it's never too late to learn
> something about your native tongue!
>
> Dubbel Dutch
> Praktische handleiding voor anderstaligen die Nederlands leren, met
> vele
> voorbeelden en vergelijkingen
> Author: Kevin Cook
> Published by: BoekWerk (1995)
> ISBN 90 5402 094 6
>
> Cheers.
>
> Grietje Menger
> Scotland
Hi Grietje and Lowlanders,

If you want to listen to official Dutch with the southern flavour of
Flemish belgium, you can watch the Flemish television on this adress:
www.vrtnieuws.net

groetjes
luc vanbrabant
oekene

----------

From: Brooks, Mark <mark.brooks at twc.state.tx.us>
Subject: LL-L "Etymology" 2004.08.30 (12) [E]

And there is "route" the way they mispronounce it up north (in the US).  We
all know it's supposed to rhyme with "house", but there are some that insist
on pronouncing it to rhyme with "boot".

Mark Brooks

----------

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

Thanks for the resource tip, Luc.  I listened to some of it.  It does indeed
sound a lot "softer" than Standard Dutch of the Netherlands.  As far as I
can tell, much of this has to do with a greater variety of allophonese of
/g/ and /x/.  As most of us know, /g/ and /x/ are still clearly
distinguished in the south.  Furthermore, I seem to have heard more frontal
allophones of them adjacent to front vowels, and apparently plalatalized
ones (almost [j] (like "y") and [C] (like in German _ich_)) before some
palatals (e.g., _twintiG_Jaar_).

Now, Mark, Mark,* my friend, I take it that was intended as tongue-in-cheek,
playful "flame-baiting."  Or were you serious about "route"?

Cheerio!
Reinhard/Ron

* _Mark, Mark, seggt de Kreih_ ([ma:k ma:k zEC de kra.I] "'Mark, Mark,' says
the crow") is a Lowlands Saxon (Low German) song by Knut Kiesewetter.

----------

From: john feather <johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Etymology

I wrote:
 >I can't immediately bring to mind any pronunciation of "ou" which matches
it: ought? would? noun? <
 and Kevin replied:
>Through, coup, coupe, loupe, frou-frou, (a type of bird), ouzo (a Greek
liqueur), outré (eccentric), oubliette (a type of dungeon), oud (a stringed
instrument, of Arabic origin)...<

Of course I could have included in my counter-examples "soul", "cough",
"enough" and "thorough". I checked the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary for
representations of the "oo(h)" sound and found that "through" and its
compounds are the only (easily traceable) words to use "ou" apart from ones
which are clearly using, like the rest of Kevin's examples, a foreign
spelling convention - in most cases a French one. I think "dour" is
pronounced slightly differently so I don't need to get into an argument
about how "foreign" it is.

Why should "through" be different? It derives by metathesis from an older
"thurh" (HG "durch") "Thurh" also gave us "thorough" by what I suspect is a
fairly standard orthographic development. So do we perhaps have "thruh"
(pronounced "throo" when the final "h" became silent) spelled "through" by
analogy with "thorough", or is there a C14 French influence here, too? No
doubt the OED has an opinion.

BTW, one occasionally still finds "through" where "thorough" is normal.
Chambers Dictionary gives "throughfare" as Shakespearean but in the alley or
passageway next to the house I was brought up in was a notice saying "No
Throughfare - for Use of Foot Passengers Only". Somewhat confusing to a
child.

John Feather johnfeather at sceptic1.freeserve.co.uk

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