LL-L "Phonology" 2005.12.24 (04) [E]

Sat Dec 24 17:45:34 UTC 2005

======================================================================
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 * 24 December 2005 * Volume 04
=======================================================================

From: Jacqueline Bungenberg de Jong <Dutchmatters at comcast.net>
Subject: LL-L "Grammar" 2005.12.17 (02) [E]

Hello Lowlanders, I just came back from vacation. Instead of snorkeling in
Hanauma Bay, I stepped right into an interesting strain. It seems to me that
the voicing of the "v" is dependent on several circumstances.
1. The letter(s) before and after the "v" in question;
Listen to yourself say "seven" and "several" The words are very
similar, but still there is an audible difference. In "several" the
presence of the "r" makes the "v" sound softer and more voiced than in
seven. At the same time I also hear a small difference when I
pronounce "receive" and "perceive". The "v" in receive is just a tad more
voiced than in "receive".
2. The place of the stress in the sentence;
The problem with "I have to talk" and "I have total recall" is that
in the first case have is stressed and in the second case total is
stressed, and the way we run the words makes that there is little
space between have and to. In the second case the stress is on "total
recall" and not on "have" and there is enough distance to voice that "v"
slightly more.

3. The rhythm of our speech or the syntax of a sentence is also a
factor in how a final consonant sounds. The best example I know is a
Dutch one. In "Ik had een hoed" (I had a hat) the d in "had" is
pronounced with a "d" sound, but at the end of the sentence the "d" in
"hoed" comes out sounding like a "t". On the other hand, in "de hoed die
ik had" (the hat I had), "had is pronounced with a "t"
Those of you who know a lot of Dutch people, are aware of our
sharp sounding consonants at the end of a word. Of course in English the
word is written and pronounced "hat" with a "t" and its' plural is
hats. The Dutch plural for "hoed" is "hoeden"

4. Justin Rehnquist (Hello Justin, glad to hear you are alive. Have you
given up on your idea to go to the Netherlands to live?) states the
following:
<I heard wildly different things - some very similar to what sounded
<almost like German "ei" combination (but slightly dipthonguized)!!
<"Heb je fEIf Euro?" I almost laughed when hearing this for some
reason?>
Yes Justin that is the way it sounds in "plat Amsterdams", but your
fine ear slipped up. "Hep je fEIf Euro?" is more like it. I think it was
you who brought the article to my attention about "Independent Dutch women
who use the diphtonged "EI" from Polder Dutch to show that they are
independent and don't have to speak the Queens Dutch of their
parents any longer to show that they are upper class and therefore
are "worthy of a good position in society". Somehow I think that is a
sad commentary on the state of affairs in the land of my birth.

5. Steven Hanson makes some interesting observations:
<This difference strikes me as being similar to the different between the
<Dutch words hebben and hoeven, with the exception that my "haff" can be
<used in positive statements as opposed to hoeven, which can only be used in

Hi Steve, Although both "hebben" and "hoeven" clearly have the same
great-grand parents, they have entirely different meanings in Dutch.
"hebben" as an independent verb means to be in posession of; like in "ik heb
een kat". is used as the helper verb in sentences like" "Ik heb de kat
gezien". "Hoeven" on the other hand belongs to a class of almost-modal verbs
It uses "te" in combination with another (action) verb like in: "Hij hoeft
geen appels te kopen" (he does not have to do any homework).
You are right when you observe that "hoeven" is almost always used as "don't
have to", but I can come up with a sentence like "de hond hoeft maar te
blaffen of hij doet de deur open" (As soon as the dog barks, he opens the
door), but in that sentence the word "maar" takes on the negative quality.
Hoeven heeft several derivatives in Dutch that point at at a negative
quality of the verb. "behoeftig" means poor and in "de plant had behoefte
aan warmte" we are clearly talking about a tropical plant needing heat.
"Zijn behoefte doen" means to defecate. You are right when you offer the
notion that "hoeven" is closer related to the English "to behoove", but in a
rather peculiar way.
English "must" and "have to" are both to be translated into Dutch as
"moeten", but in that case the rest of the sentence will clarify whether it
was Wotan thundering "YOU HAVE TO" or a whining "Must". Moeten is a true
modal verb, it does not use "te" in combination with another verb. "Je moet
appels kopen"

Steve also makes the following remark:
<As far as 'have got' is concerned, I've always thought of that as the
<present perfect tense of 'to get'.  If I'm not mistaken, in some forms of
<British English, 'got' is more common than 'gotten' as a past participle.
<I actually use 'got' when saying 'have got' instead of plain 'have', but I
<say 'gotten' in other present perfect situations.  So, I'd say something
<like "I've got three sheets of paper here."  To me this is identical to "I
<have three sheets of paper here."  But, I'd say something like "It took me
<a while, but I've really gotten used to getting up early."

Steve, that is interesting. In Dutch "krijgen" may be translated as "To
obtain something without paying for it" Like " Ik heb een hond gekregen voor
mijn verjaardag" (Somebody gave me a dog for my birthday)
Both examples of "I have three sheets of paper here", and "I've got three
sheets of paper here" need to be translated as "Ik heb hier drie stukken
papier". But "It took me a while, but I've really gotten used to getting up
early", would have to be translated in the present perfect: "Het heeft een
tijdje geduurd, maar ik ben er eindelijk aan gewend geraakt vroeg op te
staan" There clearly are two different mindsets at work here.

 Happy Midwinter Solstice you all! Jacqueline 

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