How your idiolect differs from the standard language

The best topics from Languages & Linguistics, kept on a permanent basis.
Post Reply
User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

How your idiolect differs from the standard language

Post by Skomakar'n »

The last posts in the Scandinavian topic inspired me to create this one.
I suppose not all of us speak our native tounges the way they are spoken according to the standard.

It would be interesting to see what kind of orthography you would find appealing to use for the dialect that you speak, and to see how your dialects differ from the standard language.

For example, I am from Sweden, and I speak a pretty strange idiolect, if you would compare it to the standard Swedish dialect (rikssvenska), and I really hate the Swedish orthography, so whenever I transcribe my dialect, I use an orthography that's either more like the Norwegian one, or the Faroese one. I also try to stick to etymology, since I don't like when languages have phonetical orthographies. Especially not Scandinavian ones, since we have a long tradition.

So, say you're French, but speak an idiolect that differs a bit. You might not like the French orthography, and you might feel better about applying an orthography more similar to, say, Spanish, when transcribing your dialect, and might prefer spelling the name of French as fransés, rather than français.

Shortly put, show how your idiolect would differ from the standard language, and come up with a little orthography for it, that doesn't throw etymology away and just goes for the phonetical approach. Just try to be descriptive, since everyone obviously does not speak your native tounge or knows of its grammar.

----------------------------------

So, I obviously will have to go first, since it's convenient to do so right away, in the first post.

Like I said, I speak a Swedish (or simply Scandinavian, since I really consider Danish, Norwegian and Swedish dialects varieties of a single language) variety, so I'll compare it to Swedish and other Northern Languages.

I'll start of with a little bit about the grammar. Standard Swedish and Danish have two genders; neuter and common. The common gender is a gender that contains all of the words that used to be masculine or feminine, merged into a single gender. Norwegian Bokmål allows a distinction of three genders, Norwegian Nynorsk forces it, and Icelandic and Faroese have retained all three genders as well. So has my the dialect on which my idiolect is based (and a lot of other dialects).

Here are some examples, in standard Swedish/Danish:

Neuter: hus (house), hår (hair), hjärta/hjerte (heart)
Common: bil (car), arm, hamn/havn (haven/harbour), tunga/tunge (tounge)

The neuter ones are neuter in all of the languages (hus/hús, hår/hár, hjärta/hjerte/hjarta), while only bil/bíll and arm/armur are masculine and only hamn/havn/höfn and tunga/tunge are feminine in the languages that have the larger distinction, including my dialect.

So, in Standard Swedish, Danish and optionally in Norwegian Bokmål, bil and bok (book, femine/common) would be treated the same, while in the languages and dialects with the larger distinction, they would be inflected differently, since they are of different genders in those. In Danish, though, words that were originally masculine usually get the plural ending -e, while words that were originally feminine, usually get the plural ending -er.

I'll stick to the Norwegian-based orthography for my idiolect at the moment, and bil and bok would be spelled the same as in Swedish, Danish and Norwegian (although bok is bog in Danish). Here are some examples:

English: car, the car, cars, the cars
Swedish: bil, bilen, bilar, bilarna
Bokmål: bil, bilen, biler, bilene
Nynorsk: bil, bilen, bilar, bilane
Danish: bil, bilen, biler, bilerne
My idiolect: bil, bilen, bilar, bilarne

So, they are all very similar, but they all have some difference. For this word, the only difference occurs in the plural form (and the definite plural form is different in all of the varieties).

Then we have bok:

English: book, the book, books, the books
Swedish: bok, boken, böcker, böckerna
Bokmål: bok, boken/boka, bøker, bøkene
Nynorsk: bok, boka, bøker, bøkene
Danish: bog, bogen, bøger, bøgerne
My idiolect: bok, boka, bøker, bøkerna

Let's also compare the neuter word hus:

English: house, the house, houses, the houses
Swedish: hus, huset, hus, husen
Bokmål: hus, huset, hus, husene/husa
Nynorsk: hus, huset, hus, husa/husi
Danish: hus, huset, hus, husene
My idiolect: hus, huset, hus, husa

Then, of course, my dialect has preserved the case distinction better than the Standard Scandinavian Languages. I'll stick to comparing to Swedish at the moment. Here are two inflection tables for hus, in Standard Swedish, and my idiolect:

Swedish:

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | hus        | huset      | hus        | husen      |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | hus        | husets     | hus        | husens     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
My dialect

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | hus        | huset      | hus        | husa       |
+------+            |            |            |            |
| acc. |            |            |            |            |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| dat. | huse       | husene     | huse       | husene     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | huss       | husens     | huss       | husas      |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
The -t and the -n- in the singular definite forms are all silent, though. This spelling is for etymology; the nominative, accusative and dative singular definite forms are all pronounced "huse", and the genitive one is pronounces "huses". The plural, definite dative form may also be pronounced with the n silent ("huse"/"husa").

Accusative and nominative are usually pretty much alike, but here is an example of the masculine noun bil, where the plural forms are slightly different in the accusative:

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | bil        | bilen      | bilar      | bilarne    |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| acc. | bil        | bilen      | bila       | bilana     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| dat. | bile       | bilene     | bile       | bilene     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | bils       | bilens     | bilas      | bilannas   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
The orthography doesn't fully represent the pronunciation here either; bilen is pronounced biln, and bilarne is pronounced bilare.

Compared to the Standard Swedish:

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | bil        | bilen      | bilar      | bilarna    |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | bils       | bilens     | bilars     | bilarnas   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
Then, finally, we have the feminine noun bok:

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | bok        | boka       | bøker      | bøkerna    |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| acc. | bok        | boka       | bøker      | bøkerna    |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| dat. | bok        | boka       | bøke       | bøkene     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | boks       | bokas      | bøkes      | bøkannas   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
Same thing here; bøkerna is pronounced bøkera.

Standard Swedish:

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | bok        | boken      | böcker     | böckerna   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | boks       | bokens     | böckers    | böckernas  |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
Some endings are treated differently. Masculine noun måne (moon):

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | måne       | månen      | månar      | månarne    |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| acc. | måna       | månan      | måna       | månana     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| dat. | måna       | månane     | måne       | månene     |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | måna       | månans     | månas      | månannas   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
Feminine noun gjenta (girl):

Code: Select all

+------+-------------------------+-------------------------+
|      | singular                | plural                  |
|      +------------+------------+------------+------------+
|      | indefinite | definite   | indefinite | definite   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| nom. | gjenta     | gjenta     | gjentur    | gjenturna  |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| acc. | gjente     | gjenta     | gjentur    | gjenturna  |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| dat. | gjente     | gjenta     | gjente     | gjentene   |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
| gen. | gjente     | gjentas    | gjentas    | gjentannas |
+------+------------+------------+------------+------------+
Unlike in Standard Swedish, I inflect verbs for person and number.
Here is an example with the regular verb hoppa (to jump):

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | hoppa   | hoppade   |
+----------+---------+           |
| 2p sing. | hoppar  |           |
+----------+         |           |
| 3p sing. |         |           |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| plur.    | hoppa   | hoppadu   |
+----------+---------+-----------+
The final -de and -du are silent, but -adu tends to be pronounced -au (separate), while -ade is always -a.

Another common pattern, with the word frjusa (Standard Swedish frysa; to freeze) as example:

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | frys    | fraus     |
+----------+---------+           |
| 2p sing. | frys/   |           |
+----------+ fryser  |           |
| 3p sing. |         |           |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| plur.    | frjusa  | frusu     |
+----------+---------+-----------+
A third example with irregular liggja (Standard Swedish ligga; to lie [on a bed, for example]):

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | ligg    | lå        |
+----------+---------+           |
| 2p sing. | ligg/   |           |
+----------+ ligger  |           |
| 3p sing. |         |           |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| plur.    | liggja  | lågu      |
+----------+---------+-----------+
And then a word with a more interesting different from Standard Swedish, is taka (Standard Swedish taga/ta; to take):

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | tek     | tok       |
+----------+---------+           |
| 2p sing. | tek/    |           |
+----------+ teker   |           |
| 3p sing. |         |           |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| plur.    | taku    | toku      |
+----------+---------+-----------+
Compared to Standard Swedish:

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | ta(ge)r | tog       |
+----------+---------+-----------+
The verb hava (Standard Swedish hava or ha; to have) is similar in the present tense:

Code: Select all

+----------+---------+-----------+
|          | present | preterite |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| 1p sing. | hev     | havde     |
+----------+---------+           |
| 2p sing. | hev/    |           |
+----------+ hever   |           |
| 3p sing. |         |           |
+----------+---------+-----------+
| plur.    | havu    | havdu     |
+----------+---------+-----------+
The spelling of the preterite forms are very much there for consistency and etymology; they're both pronounced /hɔ/.

I'm to lazy to continue at the moment, but I'll do so later. Let me see examples of differences in your own idiolects, compared to the standard and languages close to yours, or older forms.
Last edited by Skomakar'n on Tue May 04, 2010 11:19 am, edited 9 times in total.

User avatar
rickardspaghetti
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by rickardspaghetti »

Where are you from?
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

rickardspaghetti wrote:Where are you from?
From the same city as you. <:

User avatar
rickardspaghetti
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by rickardspaghetti »

You live here too, or somewhere else?
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

rickardspaghetti wrote:You live here too, or somewhere else?
I've always lived here.

User avatar
rickardspaghetti
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by rickardspaghetti »

Me too. My speech differs alot from yours though.
I'd say something like bok, boken, böcker, böckerna/böckera.
I think that'd be something like this in IPA, bu:k, 'bu:kɛn, 'bœk:ɛr, 'bœk:ɛɳa/'bœk:ɛɽ̃a.
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

rickardspaghetti wrote:Me too. My speech differs alot from yours though.
I'd say something like bok, boken, böcker, böckerna/böckera.
I think that'd be something like this in IPA, bu:k, 'bu:kɛn, 'bœk:ɛr, 'bœk:ɛɳa/'bœk:ɛɽ̃a.
I don't pronounce the n in the definite plural, either, just like you.

My pronunciation would be something like this:
/bu:k/, /'bu:kɔ/, /'bø:kɛr/ and /'bø:kɛrɔ/

Yng
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 880
Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:17 pm
Location: Llundain

Post by Yng »

My accent varies by word - a lot of my vowel sounds are oddly Cornish, but some words and, I think, my stress placement is quite Scouse. Also, some words, like 'school', are often quite stereotypically Welsh. I apparently mimic people I'm speaking to - with strong Welsh-accented speakers, I become more Welsh. Most people, though, think I have a very faint Cornish accent.

In terms of syntax, I vary word order quite a lot for stress, which is a typical Welsh feature:

Eating, I was.

Lexically, it's pretty much local vocabulary - there isn't very much of it, mind you. I also have a tendency to use a large number of irregular past participles in free phonological variation depending on the following sound and which sounds better.

User avatar
Miekko
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
Contact:

Post by Miekko »

My dialect of Swedish has lost pitch accent. It retains loads of old diphthongs, but has also innovated a bunch (stein, röjk, heim) . There's a rather consistent /o/ > /u/ switch (båt = /bu:t/, våg = /vu:g/, råd = /ru:d/, två = /tvu:/...), and some standard-swe <u> correspond to /Y})/ and some to /u/. Lots of other vowel shifts all over the place (note, the standard Swedish forms here aren't the historical roots, they're cognates, most of them), e.g. hyvel > hivel, kjol > tSoul`, varit > vörI, mer > meir, lada > /lIdu/, vecka > /vIku/, kyrka > /tSörts`u/, snöa > /snI:/, rum > /rY:m/, stuga > /stögu/, kvarnen > /kv{n`{n/
yxa > /öx/, björk > /bj{rk/, rönn > /reu)n/ eller /röu)n/ tegel > /tig{l`/


final -a's fallen away from all infinitives

sjunga sjöng sjungit > SuN sa:N su:ndji
(lots of stuff like that in the strong verbs)

the fricatives follow the retroflex version of the F-Swedish fricative system, that is
f v s S tS s` (ts`) h

The non-diphthongs are
/I Y u
E 2 o
{ A/ or something to that effect; yes, <i> and <y> are *never* very fronty, but almost always somewhat retracted.

The three-gender system is retained; plural imperatives ending in -en are still used by lots of people down to about 20 years of age.

There's softening of final velars before the definite endings. (skogen > /skoujIn/, träsket > /tr{stS{/.

retroflexes pop up where they usually do in retroflex dialects. I'll use single l for retroflex l and double for non-retroflex; there's some length effect on the preceding vowel as well as on the laterals themselves involved in the distinction so that kinda fits normal Swedish orthography.

the definite is used as a sort of partitive thing as well - e.g. the definite can be used when standard swedish would use articleless indefinite forms; but my dialect also permits it in some sorta quirky positions, such as
'ko:m ä na snön i häl`jen?'
'nä vi har int havi na snön po leng.'

'lyutfiskan smakar illt'
= 'lutfisk smakar illa' (lye fish tastes bad, IMD 'the lyefishes taste bad')

/pt/ > /ft/ but not entirely consistently, e.g. köpte > /tSö:ft/

pretty consistent loss of final vowels except in masculines ending in standard Swe on -e, which have been replaced by the accusative form, so e.g. swe. på:se = påsa

syllable weight rules of Swedish don't hold (e.g. in påsa, both vowels are short)

g in /gn/# doesn't turn into N, so /r{gn/, not /r{Nn/

Some a: didn't turn into /o/, so we have la:N instead of lång, tra:N instead of trång, ga: instead of gå., ma:N instead of många

some intransitives tend to lose the present tense marker -Vr, e.g. väx, frys, ...

lots of words have a homorganic stop that swedish has assimilated:
la:mb (lamm), ka:mb (kamm), rinder (rinner), vinder (vinner); the two last examples probably are innovations IMD.

initial kn and gn where earlier in free variation in some words, e.g. gnaga (knag), gnida (kni:d)

the definite endings have somewhat merged in the plural, so you don't get this agglutinating thingy with first a plural ending (also encoding the gender the noun has in the sg) then a definite plural ending (also indicating that gender), but rather either -en for neuters or -an or -na

stSouruna = skatorna
hyusen = husen
bilan = bilarna
tatSen = taken
lian = liarna
traktoran = traktorerna

damn, had to introspect through that to get it all out - I bet e.g. Aszev might even know some stuff I've forgotten since we've talked about this dialect on occasion and to great detail.
There's some syntactic differences, and some fairly interesting differences in vocab.
Also, there's a dative pronoun left, but it's sort of fading away: hennar. (oh, right, 'on' has replaced the female accusative pronoun, which makes one of Lindström's claims about Swedish dialects wrong, otoh this dialect (and a whole bunch of related ones that made the same change) is only spoken in Finland so maybe he just ignored it))
Last edited by Miekko on Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

User avatar
rickardspaghetti
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by rickardspaghetti »

You're not from mainland Sweden are you? :roll:
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

Where do you live, Miekko?

I have those diphtongs you mention initially, too, so I also say stein, röjk and heim (and I would spell them stein, røyk and heim).

I conjugate "illa" as well, so my first (masculine, singular, indefinite) form would be iller.

For me, masculine -e hasn't switched to accusative -a; instead I retain both, so I say påse (spelled pose and pronounced pøse) in nominative, and påsa in accusative and dative.

I have no present tense marker for some words either (usually when it's correct etymologically, but not always; I say "eg heit" (jag heter) instead of "eg heite", which would be correct etymologically). I say "eg frys", which is correct etymologically, but sometimes also "han frys", which isn't, and should be "han fryser" to be correct according to etymology.

Lamb and kamb are etymological, but rinda isn't. I say renna. I say lamm, and kam, but I would still write them lamb and kamb for the sake of etymology.

If I were to write using your dialect, I would probably spell /tatSen/ as takjen, because that would still keep etymology intact, while still representing the pronunciation in a logical way.
Last edited by Skomakar'n on Wed Dec 16, 2009 2:29 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Miekko
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
Contact:

Post by Miekko »

rickardspaghetti wrote:You're not from mainland Sweden are you? :roll:
some mainland dialects in the north resemble scarily much - even to the point of having a reduced pitch accent system, but yeah, my home village is like 20 km from the Swedish maritime border.

(btw, I did an edit on some parts of that post, there's a fair bit of additions made)

I'm from Björkö, 15 km north of Replot and 50ish km south of Holmön (south of Umeå). Nowadays I live in Åbo/Turku though.
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).

User avatar
Thomas Winwood
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 105
Joined: Sat Dec 14, 2002 7:47 am
Contact:

Post by Thomas Winwood »

I speak a language whose "standard" (if it can be called such) isn't spoken by anyone anymore. Nonetheless, here goes. (I won't try and construct a "phonetic" spelling, because that's a good way to get the bigger linguists to beat me up and take my lunch money.)

I don't drop Hs (I hate misconstructions like *<an hotel> [ən 'əʊtɛɫ] - it can only be <a hotel> [ə 'həʊtɛɫ]).
I don't front TH - it is <something> ['sʌmθɪŋ], never ['sʌɱfɪŋ].
I do diphthongise BEAT and BOOT - from what I can tell, they're [bɪit] and [bʊut]. I also distinguish <wholly> [hɒʊɫi] from <holy> [həʊɫi] (but <whole> and <hole> are indistinguishable as [hɒʊɫ]).
I do not diphthongise BORE - it is pronounced [bo:], such that BOARD and BORED have the same vowel. POOR, POUR and PORE all have the same vowel [o], while PURE is [pjʉ]. (Liaison applies - <poor elephant> [poɹ 'ɛlɪ̞fn̩t], <pour out> [poɹ æʊt], <pore opener> [poɹ 'əʊpənə], <pure element> [pjʉɹ 'ɛlɪ̞mn̩t].).

User avatar
Miekko
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
Contact:

Post by Miekko »

Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
no extra /j/s into those positions no.

we don't have any ankor, really, at all where I am from, it's just e:ndren; if anyone had domestic ones, I don't know what I'd call them; I think spörja/spyrja is a more westly thing, Björkö is pretty much a middle form of the ostrobothnian dialect continuum, which is a part of östsvenska, which is pretty close to sveamål and a bit less close to norrländska.
We tend to do more eastly things most of the time, altho' some affinities even with stuff going on in Trøndelag and northern Norway sometimes can be spotted in the Ostrobothnian area.

What makes my dialect funky though is the isolation on an island let us run somewhat wild with some vowel changes. /In blu:mu:l`a plu:tbu:t gup:ar pu vu:gu:na/
(== en blåmålad plåtbåt guppar på vågorna)
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

Miekko wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
no extra /j/s into those positions no.

we don't have any ankor, really, at all where I am from, it's just e:ndren; if anyone had domestic ones, I don't know what I'd call them; I think spörja/spyrja is a more westly thing, Björkö is pretty much a middle form of the ostrobothnian dialect continuum, which is a part of östsvenska, which is pretty close to sveamål and a bit less close to norrländska.
We tend to do more eastly things most of the time, altho' some affinities even with stuff going on in Trøndelag and northern Norway sometimes can be spotted in the Ostrobothnian area.

What makes my dialect funky though is the isolation on an island let us run somewhat wild with some vowel changes. /In blu:mu:l`a plu:tbu:t gup:ar pu vu:gu:na/
(== en blåmålad plåtbåt guppar på vågorna)
Trøndersk and Bergensk are the best dialects ever.

I think I pronounce that something along the lines of this:
/æjn 'bɭo:mo:ɭɔr 'pɭo:tbo:t 'gʏp:ɔr o: 'vo:gʏne/

I'd probably prefer spelling it this way:

Ein blåmålader plåtbåt guppar å vågene.

I'd be pretty interested in seeing normalized orthographies of your dialects, and not just IPA or X-SAMPA pronunciations. :D

I usually pronounce vad (spelled hvad) as /ka:/, but when I just ask people "vad?" as in "va'?", when I could hear them or something like that, it's usually /ha/ (spelled ha). Do any of you do that?

User avatar
Nortaneous
Sumerul
Sumerul
Posts: 4544
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
Location: the Imperial Corridor

Post by Nortaneous »

"to" [tʰ]
"tomorrow" [tʰmɑʁ˞əʊ̯]
"today" [tʰɾɛɪ̯]
etc.

"you have" [jæːv]
"do you have" [djæːv]
etc.

also subject dropping, retention of "have" instead of "got" in most cases, and everything I said in the other thread. I also use the past to refer to things that were referred to in the past, while everyone else up here in this damn nonsense state has this really annoying tendency to use the present and confuse the hell out of me
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.

User avatar
rickardspaghetti
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 399
Joined: Mon Feb 23, 2009 9:45 pm
Location: Sweden

Post by rickardspaghetti »

Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
そうだ。死んでいる人も勃起することが出来る。
俺はその証だ。

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

rickardspaghetti wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
It is pretty crappy to use a Finnish loanword when speakers of every other Germanic language (except for English) use their cognate of the Swedish and. They manage fine without different words for different types of ducks, and so should we (I know I do! :D).

I do consider them the same language. >:
I mean, there are many Swedish dialects that differ more from Standard Swedish than certain Norwegian Dialects and Oslo Norwegian do.

User avatar
Miekko
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
Contact:

Post by Miekko »

Skomakar'n wrote:
rickardspaghetti wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
It is pretty crappy to use a Finnish loanword when speakers of every other Germanic language (except for English) use their cognate of the Swedish and. They manage fine without different words for different types of ducks, and so should we (I know I do! :D).

I do consider them the same language. >:
I mean, there are many Swedish dialects that differ more from Standard Swedish than certain Norwegian Dialects and Oslo Norwegian do.
I do use tons of Finnish words though. For one, I can't call the place where you hang your jackets and whatever at a pub or restaurant a 'garderob' - it's quite clearly en narikka.
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

Miekko wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:
rickardspaghetti wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
It is pretty crappy to use a Finnish loanword when speakers of every other Germanic language (except for English) use their cognate of the Swedish and. They manage fine without different words for different types of ducks, and so should we (I know I do! :D).

I do consider them the same language. >:
I mean, there are many Swedish dialects that differ more from Standard Swedish than certain Norwegian Dialects and Oslo Norwegian do.
I do use tons of Finnish words though. For one, I can't call the place where you hang your jackets and whatever at a pub or restaurant a 'garderob' - it's quite clearly en narikka.
Klädskåp! We have a language of our own to create words from too. >:

User avatar
Miekko
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 364
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:43 am
Location: the turing machine doesn't stop here any more
Contact:

Post by Miekko »

Skomakar'n wrote:
Miekko wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:
rickardspaghetti wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:What about sticking /j/ into words that don't have it in Standard Swedish? I say snjø and smjør instead of snö and smör.

I also prefer words like spörja (spelled spyrja) over fråga, and I never say anka (always and).
Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
It is pretty crappy to use a Finnish loanword when speakers of every other Germanic language (except for English) use their cognate of the Swedish and. They manage fine without different words for different types of ducks, and so should we (I know I do! :D).

I do consider them the same language. >:
I mean, there are many Swedish dialects that differ more from Standard Swedish than certain Norwegian Dialects and Oslo Norwegian do.
I do use tons of Finnish words though. For one, I can't call the place where you hang your jackets and whatever at a pub or restaurant a 'garderob' - it's quite clearly en narikka.
Klädskåp! We have a language of our own to create words from too. >:
puritanism är löjligt och rätt ... ineffektivt. (E.g. det finns flera sätt att nybilda ett ord för att tala om ett koncept, medan med lånord är det mer sannolikt att alla som känner till konceptet lyckas tolka ordet rätt genast, emedan nybildade ord ibland kan vara mycket mera mångtydiga)
klädskåp är det man har hemma; garderob i bemärkelsen 'ställe vid restaurang/bar/etc där man mot en liten betalning får lämna sin jacka och väskor etc'. det kan jag inte kalla garderob under några omständigheter, det bara känns fel (finns ett antal andra saker också som jag har jättesvårt att acceptera den normala svenska benämningen för)
< Cev> My people we use cars. I come from a very proud car culture-- every part of the car is used, nothing goes to waste. When my people first saw the car, generations ago, we called it šuŋka wakaŋ-- meaning "automated mobile".

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

Miekko wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:
Miekko wrote:
Skomakar'n wrote:
rickardspaghetti wrote: Ugh! J does not belong there. Leave that to the small dialects. If people would speak like that around me, I'd look at them strange. They are either from the "less than one person/km²" part of Sweden, or they are just mentally retarded. I hope you are neither. :roll:

I always say "fråga"("spörja" is for the Norwegians) and I use both "anka" and "and". We are Swedes after all. We need some diversity from the Norwegians and Danes. We have not the same languages. They are just closely related. Now Aszev can argue against me. :mrgreen:

I know. I have prejudice. I'm a human being, not a saint. I don't treat people bad because of it. Prejudice is no problem as long as it doesn't evolve into rasism or xenophobia.
It is pretty crappy to use a Finnish loanword when speakers of every other Germanic language (except for English) use their cognate of the Swedish and. They manage fine without different words for different types of ducks, and so should we (I know I do! :D).

I do consider them the same language. >:
I mean, there are many Swedish dialects that differ more from Standard Swedish than certain Norwegian Dialects and Oslo Norwegian do.
I do use tons of Finnish words though. For one, I can't call the place where you hang your jackets and whatever at a pub or restaurant a 'garderob' - it's quite clearly en narikka.
Klädskåp! We have a language of our own to create words from too. >:
puritanism är löjligt och rätt ... ineffektivt. (E.g. det finns flera sätt att nybilda ett ord för att tala om ett koncept, medan med lånord är det mer sannolikt att alla som känner till konceptet lyckas tolka ordet rätt genast, emedan nybildade ord ibland kan vara mycket mera mångtydiga)
klädskåp är det man har hemma; garderob i bemärkelsen 'ställe vid restaurang/bar/etc där man mot en liten betalning får lämna sin jacka och väskor etc'. det kan jag inte kalla garderob under några omständigheter, det bara känns fel (finns ett antal andra saker också som jag har jättesvårt att acceptera den normala svenska benämningen för)
How could anyone misunderstand "klädskåp", and why would you need a different word for restaurants?

User avatar
Skomakar'n
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 1273
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm

Post by Skomakar'n »

YngNghymru wrote:My accent varies by word - a lot of my vowel sounds are oddly Cornish, but some words and, I think, my stress placement is quite Scouse. Also, some words, like 'school', are often quite stereotypically Welsh. I apparently mimic people I'm speaking to - with strong Welsh-accented speakers, I become more Welsh. Most people, though, think I have a very faint Cornish accent.

In terms of syntax, I vary word order quite a lot for stress, which is a typical Welsh feature:

Eating, I was.

Lexically, it's pretty much local vocabulary - there isn't very much of it, mind you. I also have a tendency to use a large number of irregular past participles in free phonological variation depending on the following sound and which sounds better.
You don't consider Welsh your native tounge?

User avatar
Torco
Smeric
Smeric
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2007 10:45 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Torco »

I tend to voice /s/ intervocally, while Standard Chilean actually lenites them all the way to [h]. I've even been known to pronounce both /n/ and /s/ when V_V as [z~] when I'm tired.

I also voice obstruents rather frequently. while some people have and [d] for intial /b/ and /d/, I always, without exeption, even initially and before a nasal, say and [D].

other than that... I dunno, I speak standard chilean.

english I speak with a very heavy accent. again, [D] for /d/ and for /b/, don't make the / i-I / distinction, say [tS] for /dZ/ and other typical chicano habits, like hating that rhotic aproximant and trilling most <r>s, unless I'm carefull.

Post Reply