LL-L "Accents" 2005.02.26 (02) [E/F]

Sat Feb 26 23:03:49 UTC 2005

======================================================================
L O W L A N D S - L * 26.FEB.2005 (02) * 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 (Zeêuws)
=======================================================================

From: Gregory Camp <camp at gwu.edu>
Subject: Accents

I've been waiting in the wings of the list for a while, happy to take in the
multidude of interesting information, but I finally
have something to say! There is a British Library website,
www.collectbritain.co.uk, with various pictures and maps about
the history of Britain, and the've recently put on a massive collection of
recordings of dialect interviews. They have had a lot
of northern England recordings on for a while, but I happened to check the
website today to find that they've added about
600 recordings from all over England! Half are from the 1950s, showing
conservative dialects which are probably extinct,
and half are from the '90s. Projects like this will hopefully allow the
general public to learn about dialects and accents which
may be dying, and may spark some interest in saving them. They might also
help to raise tolerance for other accents and
dialects.

I was in England for a week this summer, and was pleasantly surprised at how
many people spoke local dialects, or at least
with local coloring in their speech. I had had a previous picture of a
country being taken over by a London-based standard.
I wish there were some kind of American project like this one at the British
Library. It seems that people are very quick over
here to judge others based only on their accents. I am a sophomore at a
university in Washington, DC, and I've noticed that
many students with "non-standard" accents change them without realizing it,
under quiet pressure to conform. Texans
seem to have an especially hard time, maybe because our Texan president is
not very well-liked here. I was born in Texas,
so I like the accent even though I don't have it myself. I grew up in
Denver, where having a local "accent" means knowing a
lot of snowboarding terms.

Gregory Camp

----------

From:  R. F. Hahn <lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net>
Subject: Accents

Hi, Gregory!

So we finally managed to entice you out from behind the backdrop, huh?  I'm
delighted we did, and it's good to meet you.

Regards,
Reinhard "Ron" F. Hahn
Founder & Administrator, Lowlands-L
lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net
http://www.lowlands-l.net

----------

From: Шевченко <kivvik_ru at mail.ru>
Subject: Accents

Hi!
Reinhard/Ron wrote:
"There are "good" and "bad" foreign sounds, depending on the listener's
perception based on his or her own cultural conditioning.  The "good" sounds
may be perceived as "exotically charming," while the "bad" ones tend to be
associated with non-speech sounds that are to be avoided in one's own
cultural environment."

My question is: What about Russian accent of English?
How does it sound to the ear of a native speaker?

Veronika

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Accents" 2005.02.25 (01) [E]

Hi Helge e.a

About Schleswig-Holstein Low Saxon in Angeln you said that it was taken
over by the original Sønderjysk population. And that is has guttaral ch
[x] for g and even k.
Did you know that the real (Danish) Sønderjysk has ch [x] for old k too,
in inlaut, not word initially? Of course this is a development via -g- [G]
< k. Danish voiced all old voiceless stops, -k- > -g-, -p- > -b-,
-t- > -d-. In Sønderjysk, this -g- > [G]> -ch- and -b- > -v- > -f-.
The results look a bit like the High German sound shift, but the origin is
different.
Maybe this Sønderjysk ch leads to, or at least supported, Angeln ch in Low
Saxon?

About Dutch ch in former Frisian areas:
I doubt it that the areas you called have been Frisian speaking recently,
except for the Northern parts of Noord-Holland. I know that there is a
widespread theory that Frisian was spoken from Sinkfala (or De Zwin) in
Zeeuws-Vlaanderen, nowadays the Dutch-Belgium border at the coast, untill
the Wadden Sea in SW-Denmark, but that is not based on linguistic evidence.
My own theory is that along the North Sea coast, Western Germanic dialects
with so called Ingvaeonic features were spoken, and Frisian, like English
and Old Saxon, shared these characteristics with these dialects. But that
doesn't mean Frisian was spoken there. We should bear in mind as well that
many of these Ingvaeonic features are not as old as is often believed, and
for instance Old or Middle English is much less Ingvaeonic than its Modern
variety. This means that some of these Ingvaeonisms developped later, and
didn't predate the Anglo-Saxon 'conquest'of Britain. Btw, even Western
Scandinavian (Icelandic, New-Norwegian) has many in common with Western
West-Germanic, where as Eastern Scandinavian (Swedish, Danish) and Eastern
West Germanic (High German, Dutch, Modern Low Saxon) are linguistically
more conservative.

What you say about ch as an hypercorrect imitation of Brabant g (which is
in fact a palatal [G]) is interesting. It's possible too that the
local "Ingvaeonic" coast dwellers had a 'j' pronunciation for old 'g',
because 'g' was used in the orthography for old 'j' as well. Or maybe
there was a development similar to Spanish: 'gh' [G] before e, i, eu,
'g' [g] before a, o, u etc., and the former [G] generalized then?

For g [G] > ch [x], there is a parallel with initial z > s and initial
v > f in Western Dutch. This could have been triggered by immigrants from
Friesland in Amsterdam, as Friasian 'cannot' pronounce z- and v-, nor in
there own language, which has only s- and f-, neither when speaking Dutch.
The prove that this devoicing is new in Western Dutch, and not preserved
from older "Frisian" times, is that old 'th' > 'd', via 'dh', and not 't'
as in Frisian or Scandinavian.

So, old Western Germanic to Western sub standard Dutch:

g > gh [G] > ch [x]        written g-     goed [Gut] > [xut]
f > v  [V] > f             written v-     vuur [Vy:r]> [fy:r]
s > z  [z] > s             written z-     zout [zaut]> [saut]
th> dh [D] > d             written d-     ding [dIN] > [dIN]

First these sounds were voiced, then devoiced again

Ingmar

Helge Tietz hat geschrieben:
>
>I was always wondering how the Polder-Dutch G-sound was developed because
>originally the areas of Noord- and Zuid-Holland, Utrecht and Zeeland were
>Frisian speaking and nowadays Dutch is an adoption from further south,
>namely Brabant. To my knowledge, modern Frisian does not have a ch-sound
at
>all and sounds fairly soft, a surname such as "Algra" is
pronounced "Algra"
>while in Holland it is "Alchra". I can only assume that when adopting
Dutch
>the Frisians tried to imitate the alien Brabantish g-pronunciation and it
>came out as what we hear today in Amsterdam, Rotterdam etc. Since this
seems
>to be a not very popular accent to foreigners one may wonder whether they
>shouldn't have kept and developed Frisian in Holland instead of adopting
>Dutch.
>
>In Angeln in Slesvig-Holsten the local Low Saxon dialect is well known for
>its pre-vocalic ch-pronunciation for g and sometimes even k (Ik chaam ut
de
>chute chechend waa de cheelen cheochinen wassen), possibly due to some of
>the local-population's origin in the Gothenburg area or an archaic form of
>Low Saxon taken over by the original Soenderjysk population, however, it
>sounded to me almost Dutch the way the Angeliter speak and when learning
>Dutch I simply imitated the way some of my relatives speak but that
usually
>sounded to Dutch people as Flemish. I always found that quite amusing but
I
>have to admit that imitating Flemish seems much easier than Hollands to
me,
>when doing it a lot of Dutch cannot even detect me being non-native
>Dutch-speaking.
>
>Groeten
>
>Helge

----------

From: Henno Brandsma <hennobrandsma at hetnet.nl>
Subject: LL-L "Accents" 2005.02.25 (01) [E]

> From: R. F. Hahn <sassisch at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Accents
>
> Hi, Ingmar!
>
> You wrote above:
>
>> Interesting fact: Frisian (spoken in the Netherlands) does pronounce
>> g just like in German or English (hard g), or most other languages.
>> It has ch [x] as well in most cases where Dutch and German do, but
>> ch isn't used half as often as g in our languages.
>
> As far as I can tell, in this regard Westerlauwer Frisian is very
> similar to
> most Low Saxon dialects of Germany (with some exception in LS of the
> extreme
> north and west).

Hoi Ingmar, en Ron,

> Low Saxon:
>
> (1) Word-initial /g/ is pronounced [g]; e.g., _goud_ [goUt] 'good',
> _geel_ [ge:l] 'yellow'.

Dit is yn it (Westerlauwers) Frysk ek sa: oan it wurdbegjin in [g], in
gutturale "stop" as yn it Dútsk of Ingelsk: goud, giel.

> (2) Intervocalic /g/ may also be pronounced [g] or may be a voiced
> fricative
> ([G] ~ [G']/[j]); e.g., _wagen_ ["vQ:g=N] ~ ["vQ:G=N]  'waggon',
> _wegen_
> ["ve:g=N] ~ ["ve:G'=N] ~ ["ve:j=N] 'because', _vragen_ ["frQ:g=N] ~
> ["frQ:G=N] 'questions'.

Dit is by ús meast in [G], byg. "freegje" = [fre:Gj@], "fragen" = [fra:G at n]
mar dat lêste wurdt ek wol mei [g] sein, mar dit is seldsum.
In soad ynterfokalyske -g- binne fansels ferdwûn: wein (=_wagen_ yn ND en
NL).
Yn in lienwurd as "wagon" (fan in trein) is it meast wol [wagon] mei in [g].

> (3) Syllable-final /g/ is a voiceless fricative ([x] ~ [C]); e.g., _dag_
> [dax] 'day', _weg_ [vEC] 'way', _slag_ [slax] 'hit', 'blow'.

Op 'e ein wurdt in koarte -g altyd in [x], nei in lang lûd sis ik it sels
(en guon oaren) wol licht stimhawwend. Yn cht is it altyd in [xt]. Mar Frysk
hat ek [sk] dêr't it Nederlânsk in [sx] hat, en dit nêst it feit dat de
begjin [G] fan it Ned. der ek net is, makket dat it Frysk de [x] safolle net
hat. Foar -je as ferlytsingswurd krije wy in stimleaze [x], foar -je as
tidwurdsútgong is it in [G]: each (E. at x], by de measten, by my [E. at G] (net
tige stimhawwend mar net alheel in [x], yn âldere boeken stiet wol dat dizze
útspraak doe noch normaal wie); eachje [E. at xj@] = Ned. oogje, eagje [E. at gj@]
= Ned. "bekijken" (net alheel krekt oerset, mar ja, it tiidwurd "oereagje" =
Ned overzien, komt byg. ek foar).
Fandêr it staveringsferskil tusken "fraach" en "fragen": it boppesteande lit
sjen dat [x] en [G]
twa ferskillende fonemen binne (al is de belêsting leech), dat hawwe se
besletten dat dit ferskil
rûnom werjûn wurde moast, ek dêr't dit eins net hoecht, omdat de measten
einûntstimming as regel hawwe.

> (4) Where final /-e/ has been deleted, final devoicing (3) does not apply;
> e.g., (_dage_ >) _daag'_ [dQ:.G] 'days', (_wege_ >) _weeg'_ [ve:.G'] ~
> [ve:.j] 'ways', (_slege_ >) _sleeg'_ [sle:.G'] ~ [sle:.j] 'hits',
> 'blows', (_vrage_ >) _vraag'_ [frQ:.G] 'question'.

Dit komt by ús net foar.

> Final devoicing of /g/ is (reduntantly and inconsistently) represented
> in W.
> Frisian; e.g., <fraach> (should be <fraag>) 'question' vs. <fragen>
> 'questions'.
>
Ik sis "frage" [fraG@], dan hast dat probleem net...

> By and large, the treatment of /g/ in Low Saxon as explained above also
> applies in older Northern German dialects, assumedly due to LS
> substrates.
>
> Regards,
> Reinhard/Ron

Groetnis

Henno Brandsma

----------

From: Ingmar Roerdinkholder <ingmar.roerdinkholder at WORLDONLINE.NL>
Subject: LL-L "Accents" 2005.02.25 (04) [E]

>>>Well, Dutch dialects with g > h, always have h > -. Zeeuws and Flemish
dialect never preserve initial h. So 'haon' = to go (D. gaan) and
'aon(e)' = rooster (D. haan).
But when these people try to speak Standard Dutch, the can easily mix up h
and g. Hypercorrect g- for Standard Dutch -h is quite usual in Zeeland and
Flanders. My grandmother for example, who is from Zeeuws-Vlaanderen, did
this all the time, and Flemish teachers I had when I studied in Eindhoven
did the same.

South Western accent Dutch:
'Gij geeft' = he has, in stead of Standard Dutch 'hij heeft'.
But, 'gij geeft' in (Southern) Dutch means in fact 'you give'!

The strange thing is, that in their dialect these words begin with a vowel,
but when speaking Standard with an accent, they get initial g...

Ingmar

On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 15:27:53 -0800, Lowlands-L <lowlands-l at lowlands-l.net>
wrote:
>Ingmar wrote [ro:ut']:
>"In the other Southern (South Western) varieties of Zeeland (NL) and
>Flanders (Belgium), the g/ch have become h: hoed [hut] = D. goed [xut]
>'good', heven ["he:v=n] = D. geven ["xe:iv@] 'give' etc.  That sounds
quite
>soft too."
>Okay, is there any blurring of "heeft" and "geeft"?  Sometimes when I'm
>talking to people, I'll have to stipulate which [pIn] I mean.  Here in
Texas
>(and many other places in this country) "pen" and "pin" are pronounced the
>same.  So, we'll sometimes have to say, "Do you have a pen? Ink pen, I
>mean."  Do the Flemings say anything like "Ik geeft...met g" or "Ik
>heeft...met h"?

----------

From: Críostóir Ó Ciardha <paada_please at yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: LL-L "Accents" 2005.02.25 (06) [E]

It is fascinating to read the attitudes of different people(s) to different
accents, sounds and ways of speaking. From my own point of view, a few more
observations.

It's quite odd being a Cornishman with a Nottingham accent. For those who
don't know, the Cornish accent is perceived by other English speakers (at
least in Britain and Ireland) as a rural, farmer's accent, conjuring up
images of groups of toothless old men drinking jugs of cider and muttering
racisms, sexisms and other assorted prejudices to one another. It is also
probably associated with low intellect. Most English people do not draw a
distinction between the Cornish accent and those of South West England
(which in turn is split into Devonian, Zummerzet, Bristow, Gloucestershire,
and so on). They sound very similar. The funny thing is, I have none of
those prejudices toward the Cornish accent(s) (which I grew up around), yet
I do see those of South West England as representative of toothless old men
drinking jugs of... etc.

In Ireland most people presume I have a Manchester accent. The Manchester
accent seems to be held in fairly high esteem here, perhaps becau se of the
Manchester music scene of the early 1990s, or perhaps because most Irish
people associate all northern accents with the city. Perhaps my accent has
become more nasal and Manchester-like over time. In any case, northern
English accents (excluding Scouse) seem to be well-received by non-northern
speakers, who associate the accents with hardiness, honesty, proletarian
neighbourliness, warmth and conviviality a la Coronation Street. Contrast
the way the southern English accents are despised in the north of England.
Most are considered to be simply London accents. I certainly find it hard to
tell the difference between a Portsmouth accent and a London one. Similarly,
the RP accent is not received well by me - it sounds pompous, affected and
untrustworthy.

In Ireland, the Dublin ("Dub") accent is looked down upon by everyone else,
and the Dubs look down on the rest of the country as "culchies", a
derogatory term implying an ignorant, back woods peasant (the urban / rural
divide is a common source of prejudice across the island). The Dublin 4
accent is the Irish equivalent of RP and is generally not liked, even as it
aspired to by almost everyone in the south. Although there are many accents
within cities and counties, the Belfast accent (even though it is split into
West Belfast, East Belfast and South Belfast) is ill perceived in the rest
of the north, especially in Derry where it is associated with
high-mindedness and bossiness.

Go raibh maith agaibh,

Criostóir.

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