LL-L "Phonology" 2004.10.02 (01) [E]

[Lowlands-L]

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 02.OCT.2004 (01) * 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: Thomas <t.mcrae at uq.net.au>
Subject: LL-L "Phonology" 2004.10.01 (04) [E]

Hugo Zweep <hugo.zweep at valuersillawarra.com.au> wrote
> In Australia, during the past year or so, we have been watching television
> programmes made in Scotland. Some of these have occasionally used
sub-titles
> even though the actors have been speaking, albeit heavily accented,
English.
Haven't come across them here in Brisbane Hugo but if they are on Commercial
stations I never watch them. One local station started showing "Taggart"
movies at 2 am until irate Scots contacted them to ask why. The response was
that nobody could understand them. It was pointed out that so many American
movies, the dominant stream, had indistinct dialogue and needed sub titles
more than any Scots feature. In the end the station succumbed, Taggart got
peak viewing time and became a hit Queensland wide, now it's Australia wide
and no subtitles thank heaven.
I recall the days when News programmes had subtitles below anybody speaking
with a non English or Australian accent. Haven't seen those for yoinks
either. Good riddance we are becoming a lot less insular than we were in the
1970's.
Regards
Tom
Tom Mc Rae PSOC
Brisbane Australia
"The masonnis suld mak housis stark and rude,
To keep the pepill frome the stormes strang,
And he that fals, the craft it gois all wrang."
>>From 15th century Scots Poem 'The Buke of the Chess'

----------

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

Henno, Mark, Ron:

Thanks for your comments on Frisian (etc) pronunciation. A few immediate
points which occur to me:

1. Why is the pronunciation Henno suggests so different from the one used in
my language course? It was published under the auspices of the Fryske
Akademy in 1969 so presumably it represented some consensus at that time. It
illustrates 'ea' with the words: gean/stean/brea/dea/hea/ea/nea. Henno, do
you say all these are pronounced like "brea", as if spelt 'ie'?

2. Henno wrote: "Also both varieties have had a similar fronting of the
monophthongisation of Germanic "au" (as in "bread", and Frisian "brea" (<
bra:(d)), but this is more the result of a common tendency to front and
diphthongise." But we have OE "bread" which began moving towards a
monophthong around 1600 but didn't standardise on it till about 1750. In
OFris (about 1250?) we find "brad", already with a monophthong, which
eventually becomes a diphthong again - "brea". So the evolutionary paths
from 'au' seem very different.

3. BTW people who want to see similarities between Eng and Fris (and
differences from other langs) like to cite E "boat" Fris "boat" Du "boot" G
"Boot". What they don't grasp is that the similarities are orthographic and
the phonetics are completely the reverse: Fris 'oa' is a diphthong and the
other words are as similar as they can be given the differences in vowel
quality between these langs. They also fail to notice that all the other
words are in fact late borrowings (direct or indirect) from Eng.

4. Mark said: "Ron has raised the point already that the orthography is more
different than the pronunciation in the Teutonic tongues". "Teutonic" isn't
quite the right word but it will do. I don't recall that this was ever more
than a dogmatic statement, ie I don't remember that Ron has ever been
prepared to define its limits, but I may be mistaken. Considering the
Frisian words above, the authors of my text clearly thought the vowel was
the same in each. But if we compare them with Dutch we get
gaan/staan/brood/dood/hooi/ooit/nooit - three different sounds. In English,
using the contracted forms of "ever" and "never", we get 5 sounds
(go//stand//bread/dead//hay//e'er/ne'er). How could any orthographic
convention smooth over these differences?

5. The "good butter" version surely leaves too few similarities - or did it
arise after people realised that "brea" and "bread" are really rather
different? Maybe some sailors who had heard the saying tried to buy some
"brea" in England?

John Feather CS 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.
======================================================================