The Dutch Topic

The best topics from Languages & Linguistics, kept on a permanent basis.
User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

The Dutch Topic

Post by MUBA »

Once again, in one of my regular visits to #almea, Dutch seems to be a slightly popular language.

So here I present: The Dutch Topic!
Any questions about this Germanic language? Ask, and I will answer if I can.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

chris_notts
Avisaru
Avisaru
Posts: 275
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 9:05 am
Location: Nottingham, England
Contact:

Re: The Dutch Topic

Post by chris_notts »

MUBA wrote:Once again, in one of my regular visits to #almea, Dutch seems to be a slightly popular language.

So here I present: The Dutch Topic!
Any questions about this Germanic language? Ask, and I will answer if I can.


Very well. Want a throat sweet? :P I'm just joking.... I don't know enough about Dutch to know what to ask. What Tenses, Aspects, Moods and Persons do Dutch verbs mark?
Try the online version of the HaSC sound change applier: http://chrisdb.dyndns-at-home.com/HaSC

Echobeats
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 183
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Edinburgh, Scotland

Post by Echobeats »

1. What conditions does something have to fulfil in order to be called gezellig? When can I use this word and when not?

2. What is the X-SAMPA for <ch>, <g> and <r>? How do these vary between dialects?

3. Are there any dialectal differences over whether verbs are strong or weak? For example, in English the verb "treat" is weak in Standard English, but strong in Geordie (Newcastle English): there the preterite is "tret". Does anything like this happen in the Netherlands?

4. Is there any sort of dialect continuum between Dutch and Frisian, or is Frisian an Abstand language?

5. What conditions the use of participle-auxiliary versus auxiliary-participle word order in subordinate clauses? (E.g. dat hij gegaan is versus dat hij is gegaan.)

6. Can the Dutch aspect system cope with sentences like English "I see you have been painting the house" (if you imagine me going to my neighbour's house and seeing him relaxing in a garden chair with the paintbrush in his hand and the wall half-painted ? he hasn't finished yet but he's taking a break) or "I have been reading your book" (I'm in the middle of it, and am not reading it right at this very moment)?

That's all for the moment. Thanks.

Yours, Tim.
[i]Linguistics will become a science when linguists begin standing on one another's shoulders instead of on one another's toes.[/i]
—Stephen R. Anderson

[i]Málin eru höfuðeinkenni þjóðanna.[/i]
—Séra Tómas Sæmundsson

chris-gr
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 60
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 9:44 am
Location: greece

Post by chris-gr »

Echobeats wrote:
"1. What conditions does something have to fulfil in order to be called gezellig? When can I use this word and when not?"

I've got the same question too :)
'I speak esperanto like a native'

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Re: The Dutch Topic

Post by MUBA »

chris_notts wrote:Very well. Want a throat sweet? :P I'm just joking.... I don't know enough about Dutch to know what to ask. What Tenses, Aspects, Moods and Persons do Dutch verbs mark?


Tenses and aspects
Ok, here I go. I just try to translate the English names literally to English.

Onvoltooid Tegenwoordig (present imperfect)
Active: Ik ben slaande - I am hitting
Passive: Ik word geslagen - I am being hit

Onvoltooid Verleden (past imperfect)
Active: Ik was slaande - I was hitting
Passive: Ik werd geslagen - I was being hit

Onvoltooid Toekomend (future imperfect)
A: Ik zal slaande zijn - I will be hitting
P Ik zal geslagen worden - I will be being hit

Onvoltooid Verleden Toekomend (past future imperfect)
A: Ik zou slaande zijn - I would be hitting
P: Ik zou geslagen worden - I would be being hit

Voltooid Tegenwoordig (present perfect)
A: Ik heb geslagen - I have hit
P: Ik ben geslagen - I am hit

Voltooid Verleden (past peftect)
A: Ik zal geslagen hebben - I will have hit
P: Ik was geslagen - I was hit

Voltooid Toekomend (future perfect)
A: Ik zal geslagen hebben - I will have hit
P: Ik zal geslagen zijn - I will be hit

Voltooid Verleden Toekomend (Past future perfect)
A: Ik zou geslagen hebben - I would have hit
P: Ik zou geslagen zijn - I would have been hit


Moods
There is indicative: I hit :)
There is imperative: Hit him!
There is subjunctive: Long live the queen, God be with us
And of course infinitive: to hit

Persons
Well this one is pretty simple. There are three persons, both in singular and plural. Besides that, there is a formal second singular.

Code: Select all

            nom     acc/dat  pos
1s          ik      me/mij   mijn
2s          jij     jou      jouw
2s (formal) u       u        uw
3s (male)   hij     hem      zijn
3s (female) ze/zij  haar     haar

1p          wij     ons      ons/onze
2p          jullie  jullie   jullie
3p          zij     hen      hun

* Nom, acc and dat are just the plain old subject, direct object and indirect object.
Possesive is the possessive pronoun.

In the reply below,
Siride wrote:Where did "jullie" come from?

I dunno, actually :)
Last edited by MUBA on Mon Apr 25, 2005 4:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

Siride
Niš
Niš
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:53 pm
Location: UNC-Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Post by Siride »

Where did "jullie" come from?

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

Echobeats wrote:1. What conditions does something have to fulfil in order to be called gezellig? When can I use this word and when not?


It varies. A typical example of "gezelligheid" (gezelligness) is, I think, when you're with a group of friends, on holiday somewhere. It's night. You guys made a camp fire. One or two of you are playing guitar. Maybe you're singing the typical camp fire songs they're playing. Maybe you're just sitting, staring into the fire, listening to the music and singing.

Another example. People want this to be "gezellig", but sometimes it is not: the christmas diner :)

Laying on bed together with your boy/girlfriend, talking about how much you love each other is also very gezellig. Or romantic, maybe.

The general idea of gezelligheid is that you're together with people (one, two, three, infinite) you like, having a (more than) good time.

2. What is the X-SAMPA for <ch>, <g> and <r>? How do these vary between dialects?


See above :) That's not X-SAMPA, but SAMPA, but I think it should do it.

3. Are there any dialectal differences over whether verbs are strong or weak? For example, in English the verb "treat" is weak in Standard English, but strong in Geordie (Newcastle English): there the preterite is "tret". Does anything like this happen in the Netherlands?


In a way. In Limburgs (Limburg is a province in the South of the country) there are some rules which are not like Standard Dutch. Some of those rules are directly borrowed from German. But then again, some people say Limburgs actually is a German dialect, not a Dutch one - I even heard a Limburger saying that!

4. Is there any sort of dialect continuum between Dutch and Frisian, or is Frisian an Abstand language?


Frisian is a seperate language. I don't know if there are Frisian dialects, though :)

5. What conditions the use of participle-auxiliary versus auxiliary-participle word order in subordinate clauses? (E.g. dat hij gegaan is versus dat hij is gegaan.)


AFAIK, this is merely a matter of style.
"Ik hoop dat hij gegaan is, want dan kunnen we roken" and "Ik hoop dat hij is gegaan, want dan kunnen we roken" are exactly the same (I hope he's gone, because then we can smoke)

I can think of no example in which this word order actually matters.

6. Can the Dutch aspect system cope with sentences like English "I see you have been painting the house" (if you imagine me going to my neighbour's house and seeing him relaxing in a garden chair with the paintbrush in his hand and the wall half-painted – he hasn't finished yet but he's taking a break) or "I have been reading your book" (I'm in the middle of it, and am not reading it right at this very moment)?


Yes, I think it can.
I see you have been painting the house - Ik zie dat je het huis aan het verven geweest bent
This really indicates some painting has been done, but it has not yet been finished.

I have been reading your book - Ik heb in je boek gelezen.
Note, though, that the preposition "in" is important here. It means: "I have been reading in your book". Without it (Ik heb je boek gelezen) would mean "I have read your book".
But it's more common to say: "ik ben je book aan het lezen" (I am reading your book).

That's all for the moment. Thanks.
Yours, Tim.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

gsandi
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 10:13 am
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by gsandi »

Siride wrote:Where did "jullie" come from?


Middle Dutch je 'you' + lie(den) 'people'.

je itself was a dialectal/colloquial form of the 2nd person plural personal pronoun, longer form jij. Clearly related to older English ye.

(Source: B.C. Donaldson: Dutch - A linguistic history of Holland and Belgium, p.171)

Siride
Niš
Niš
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:53 pm
Location: UNC-Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Post by Siride »

gsandi wrote:
Siride wrote:Where did "jullie" come from?


Middle Dutch je 'you' + lie(den) 'people'.

je itself was a dialectal/colloquial form of the 2nd person plural personal pronoun, longer form jij. Clearly related to older English ye.

(Source: B.C. Donaldson: Dutch - A linguistic history of Holland and Belgium, p.171)

Hmm, I had guessed as much. Thanks for the verification.

More questions:
1) What's the real pronunciation of 'w'? I think I've heard it as more of a 'w' and in Comrie's World's Major Languages book, they used a script 'v' (or maybe upsilon) for that sound.
2) What's the deal with "word" being present, but "werd" being past (from your examples of tenses above)? Seems a little backwards to me.

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

Siride wrote:
gsandi wrote:
Siride wrote:Where did "jullie" come from?


Middle Dutch je 'you' + lie(den) 'people'.

je itself was a dialectal/colloquial form of the 2nd person plural personal pronoun, longer form jij. Clearly related to older English ye.

(Source: B.C. Donaldson: Dutch - A linguistic history of Holland and Belgium, p.171)

That's exactly what I had guessed. I'll give myself one point for that.

More questions:
1) What's the real pronunciation of 'w'?
2) What's the deal with "word" being present, but "werd" being past (from your examples of tenses above)? Seems a little backwards to me.


1) I think it is like English "why", but with less rounded lips. Somewhere inbetween "why" and "hi" maybe.

2) I do not fully understand this question. You are asking why "word" is present and "werd" past? If so, I don't know the answer. But somehow I think you mean something slightly different.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

Siride
Niš
Niš
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Mar 17, 2003 9:53 pm
Location: UNC-Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Post by Siride »

2) I do not fully understand this question. You are asking why "word" is present and "werd" past? If so, I don't know the answer. But somehow I think you mean something slightly different.

You have the question correct. In German, the present is "werd-" and the past is "ward-" or "wurde-". But in Dutch it appears reversed, which is interesting and thus my question.

User avatar
FFF
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:27 pm

Post by FFF »

Siride wrote:1) What's the real pronunciation of 'w'? I think I've heard it as more of a 'w' and in Comrie's World's Major Languages book, they used a script 'v' (or maybe upsilon) for that sound.

IIRfC, it's /P/. (Not sure it's the right X-Sampa, it's a labiodental approxiament)

Nice thread. If I was going to learn another West Germanic language, I'd definately go for Dutch.

User avatar
Space Dracula
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 111
Joined: Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:10 pm
Location: Austin fuckin Texas
Contact:

Post by Space Dracula »

Of the /E/ and /A/ versions of <ij>, which one is more standard and which is more rural?

Just looking at them I'm wanting to say /ai/ for <ij> because it makes words like zijn closer to German sein.

I also think in Afrikaans <g> is /G/, at least from my Dad's speech.
<Dudicon> i would but you're too fat to fit in my mouth!!

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

Siride wrote:
2) I do not fully understand this question. You are asking why "word" is present and "werd" past? If so, I don't know the answer. But somehow I think you mean something slightly different.

You have the question correct. In German, the present is "werd-" and the past is "ward-" or "wurde-". But in Dutch it appears reversed, which is interesting and thus my question.


You're right. Interesting indeed. Unfortunately, I'm not able to answer the question :)


Space Dracula wrote:Of the /E/ and /A/ versions of <ij>, which one is more standard and which is more rural?

Just looking at them I'm wanting to say /ai/ for <ij> because it makes words like zijn closer to German sein.

I also think in Afrikaans <g> is /G/, at least from my Dad's speech.


I'm not really good in (X-)SAMPA, but according to your comparison with German 'sein', I think it is not /ai/. So /ei/ is more default. But then I'd like to give you the link to the site about Polder Dutch again. It's the same link Junes gave before.

Anyway, this sound change makes <ij> indeed pronounced like /ai/.


Phasmo wrote:
Siride wrote:1) What's the real pronunciation of 'w'? I think I've heard it as more of a 'w' and in Comrie's World's Major Languages book, they used a script 'v' (or maybe upsilon) for that sound.

IIRfC, it's /P/. (Not sure it's the right X-Sampa, it's a labiodental approxiament)

Nice thread. If I was going to learn another West Germanic language, I'd definately go for Dutch.


Could you say what you like about Dutch? And what other West Germaninc languages - except for apperently English - do you know?
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

User avatar
Åge Kruger
Lebom
Lebom
Posts: 169
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2003 9:33 am
Location: Norway
Contact:

Post by Åge Kruger »

Space Dracula wrote:I also think in Afrikaans <g> is /G/, at least from my Dad's speech.


<g> is /g/ medially and in loan words, too.
[quote="Soviet Russia"]If you can't join them, beat them.[/quote]

Grath
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 20
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:09 am
Location: Site of the Great PIE *a Theft

Post by Grath »

Well, here's my two eurocents.
I'm a bit puzzled at your verb thingy, MUBA. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the onvoltooid tegenwoordig(e tijd) be "ik sla", the onvoltooid verleden (tijd) "ik sloeg", and stuff like that, in stead of "ik ben slaande" en "ik was slaande"? They sound very unnatural to me.
Also, both <g> (except in loanwords) and <ch> are always /x/ in my part of the woods (Haarlem), as far as I can tell. Also, IMD, <w> is /v/ and <v> is /f/... although there does seem to be a slight difference with <f>.
Other than that, great thread, keep up the good work!

Junes
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 31
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 4:43 am
Location: Utrecht, The Netherlands

Post by Junes »

Grath wrote:I'm a bit puzzled at your verb thingy, MUBA. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the onvoltooid tegenwoordig(e tijd) be "ik sla", the onvoltooid verleden (tijd) "ik sloeg", and stuff like that, in stead of "ik ben slaande" en "ik was slaande"? They sound very unnatural to me.


Yeah, I was I bit puzzled by that, too.

muccimas
Niš
Niš
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2004 1:56 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: The Dutch Topic

Post by muccimas »

MUBA wrote:Onvoltooid Tegenwoordig (present imperfect)
Active: Ik ben slaande - I am hitting
Onvoltooid Verleden (past imperfect)
Active: Ik was slaande - I was hitting
Onvoltooid Toekomend (future imperfect)
A: Ik zal slaande zijn - I will be hitting
Onvoltooid Verleden Toekomend (past future imperfect)
A: Ik zou slaande zijn - I would be hitting

Have you ever heard of someone using that? :roll:

It is better to say 'Ik ben aan het slaan' and 'Ik was aan het slaan' for the first two. The 'onvoltooid toekomend actief' en 'onvoltooid verleden toekomend actief' is really nonsense in Dutch! (ik zal slaande zijn, whaha! :P )
lenelinele pelapeda

User avatar
FFF
Sanci
Sanci
Posts: 22
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:27 pm

Post by FFF »

Could you say what you like about Dutch? And what other West Germaninc languages - except for apperently English - do you know

Well, Dutch is very close to German, which I like, but I've come to find that it sounds better. Not nearly as harsh. Also, the orthography is cool. :)

And the only West Germanic language I know is English (but I have looked at some others).

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Post by linguoboy »

How's your historical linguistics? zhenlin had some questions about i-umlaut and while I remember that it works differently in Dutch and German, I can't remember exactly how differently.

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

Grath wrote:Well, here's my two eurocents.
I'm a bit puzzled at your verb thingy, MUBA. Wouldn't it make more sense to have the onvoltooid tegenwoordig(e tijd) be "ik sla", the onvoltooid verleden (tijd) "ik sloeg", and stuff like that, in stead of "ik ben slaande" en "ik was slaande"? They sound very unnatural to me.
Also, both <g> (except in loanwords) and <ch> are always /x/ in my part of the woods (Haarlem), as far as I can tell. Also, IMD, <w> is /v/ and <v> is /f/... although there does seem to be a slight difference with <f>.
Other than that, great thread, keep up the good work!


muccimas wrote:
MUBA wrote:Onvoltooid Tegenwoordig (present imperfect)
Active: Ik ben slaande - I am hitting
Onvoltooid Verleden (past imperfect)
Active: Ik was slaande - I was hitting
Onvoltooid Toekomend (future imperfect)
A: Ik zal slaande zijn - I will be hitting
Onvoltooid Verleden Toekomend (past future imperfect)
A: Ik zou slaande zijn - I would be hitting

Have you ever heard of someone using that? :roll:

It is better to say 'Ik ben aan het slaan' and 'Ik was aan het slaan' for the first two. The 'onvoltooid toekomend actief' en 'onvoltooid verleden toekomend actief' is really nonsense in Dutch! (ik zal slaande zijn, whaha! :P )


Oh my... yes, you are right there :)
My fault :oops:
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

linguoboy wrote:How's your historical linguistics? zhenlin had some questions about i-umlaut and while I remember that it works differently in Dutch and German, I can't remember exactly how differently.


Dutch has no i-umlaut. The Dutch ? is called "i met trema". I will try to explain how it works.

Let's take the Dutch wordd for Italy: Ital?e
Without the trema, it would sound like /itali/. But the trema indicates &lt;ie&gt; does not meat /i/ but /i@/ -> /itali@/.

I hope this is clear.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Post by linguoboy »

MUBA wrote:
linguoboy wrote:How's your historical linguistics? zhenlin had some questions about i-umlaut and while I remember that it works differently in Dutch and German, I can't remember exactly how differently.

Dutch has no i-umlaut.

Yes, it does; all West Germanic languages do. "Umlaut" is the name for both a kind of phonetic change (known to Celticists as "vowel affection") and the diacritic which sometimes indicates the result of it. Dutch lacks the latter, but exhibits the former. Otherwise how do you explain alternations like lang, but lengte? (Cf. English long, length; German lang, L?nge.)

User avatar
MUBA
Niš
Niš
Posts: 14
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 2:36 am
Location: Deventer, The Netherlands

Post by MUBA »

linguoboy wrote:
MUBA wrote:
linguoboy wrote:How's your historical linguistics? zhenlin had some questions about i-umlaut and while I remember that it works differently in Dutch and German, I can't remember exactly how differently.

Dutch has no i-umlaut.

Yes, it does; all West Germanic languages do. "Umlaut" is the name for both a kind of phonetic change (known to Celticists as "vowel affection") and the diacritic which sometimes indicates the result of it. Dutch lacks the latter, but exhibits the former. Otherwise how do you explain alternations like lang, but lengte? (Cf. English long, length; German lang, L?nge.)


Isn't that what is called ablaut? Or am I completely wrong here?
To me, umlaut is the "-diacritic.
[url=http://members.home.nl/par/vsca/vsca.htm]VSCA home[/url] - [url=http://vsca.suddenlaunch3.com/index.cgi]VSCA forums[/url]
[quote]<Naima> Chocolate is the zbb[/quote]

User avatar
linguoboy
Sanno
Sanno
Posts: 3681
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2002 9:00 am
Location: Rogers Park/Evanston

Post by linguoboy »

MUBA wrote:Isn't that what is called ablaut? Or am I completely wrong here?

Completely. Hopefully, this Wikipedia article should help clarify matters.

To me, umlaut is the "-diacritic.

It can be that, but that is not its only--or, indeed, even its primary--meaning.

Post Reply