zompist bboard

Hello all.

I've always seen Dutch <g> transcribed as /G/, but, in any spoken Dutch I've heard, it always sounds like [X]... if anyone knows anything about this you guys will. Is /G/ just a traditional notation and [X] used nonetheless by the majority of the population, or have I just heard a very biased sample of spoken Dutch?

Thanks.

From what I know, northern Dutch dialects have largely merged /ɣ/ with /x/ as [x]*, while southern Dutch dialects have kept them separate but have fronted them so that they are realized as [ʝ] and [ç] respectively (where devoicing does not apply, as then they are both [ç]). With this in mind, marking the two as /ɣ/ and /x/ seems reasonable, as it reflects historical pronunciation, and synchronically is a suitable compromise between both the more backed but merged (as voiceless) pronunciation found in northern Dutch dialects and the fronted but voicing-distinguishing pronunciations found in southern Dutch dialects.

* Many northern Dutch dialects have a general lack of voicing for fricatives, also merging Standard Dutch /f/ and /v/ as [f] and Standard Dutch /s/ and /z/ as [s] in all positions.

So basically there's no place where /ɣ/ is really [ɣ]? It's either [ʝ] or [χ]. Anyway I hear that the Dutch dialects that merge the [v] and [ɣ] sounds to voiceless still keep the {w} and {r} sounds (which are probably [ʋ] and [ʀ]) voiced, right?

Soap wrote:So basically there's no place where /ɣ/ is really [ɣ]? It's either [ʝ] or [χ]. Anyway I hear that the Dutch dialects that merge the [v] and [ɣ] sounds to voiceless still keep the {w} and {r} sounds (which are probably [ʋ] and [ʀ]) voiced, right?

<r> is /r/, but can be [4], [r], [R] and [r\] depending on the word & dialect.

Northern Dialects have often no voicing distinction. I say often cuz some dialects have distinction /s/ <-> /z/. The "rumored" g is simply a /X/ in the Northern Dialects for pretty much any g you see. I've seen some argue that some words have a different pronunciation such as /x/, but this may be possibly cases where /X/ becomes [x], such as the distinction between <acht> and <gaan>.

Yeah, in the west (the Hollands & surroundings) it's: ch, g [χ]. The letter r is [ɾ] in all situations except [ɹ(ʲ)] syllable-finally.

In the very south, where I am, we have ch [x] next to back/open vowels and [ç] next to front/closed vowels. The letter g represents [ɣ] and [ʝ] in similar environments.

The voicing extends to all fricatives. The Hollands also lack a [v/f] and [s/z] distinction, while we preserved it.

The 'soft g', as it is called, is mostly limited to the south-eastern chunk of the country. Central and north-eastern dialects, I believe, also have voicing contrasts but have uvular sounds (at least Drents does).

Please note that word-finally all sounds are unvoiced, in all of the Dutch dialects.

dinnae wrote:Please note that word-finally all sounds are unvoiced, in all of the Dutch dialects.

All consonant sounds, surely. Unless you've been keeping some voiceless vowels secret from the world .

dinnae wrote:Please note that word-finally all sounds are unvoiced, in all of the Dutch dialects.

My word final /r/ feels discriminated. (as do my /m/ , /n/, /N/ and /l/ but that's more obvious).

If it'd be devoiced word-finally, it would merge with /x/ for me. My /x/ is pronounced [X] and my /r/ is pronounced [R].

In the West-Brabantian dialect where /x/ is simply pronounced [x] the /r/ does tend to devoice.

maar 'but' becomes [maX] which tends to confuse the hell out of me as due to my (north-western) ear, I hear maag 'stomach'.

Echobeats wrote:

dinnae wrote:Please note that word-finally all sounds are unvoiced, in all of the Dutch dialects.

All consonant sounds, surely. Unless you've been keeping some voiceless vowels secret from the world .

The word you want here is obstruent rather than consonant; Dutch does not devoice final approximants.

Yeah, blah blah. I guess I could've been more specific. I meant plosives and fricatives. And it appears in some dialects the rhotic as well.

phoenix wrote:maar 'but' becomes [maX] which tends to confuse the hell out of me as due to my (north-western) ear, I hear maag 'stomach'.

Wut? I thought you're from the very SOUTH west?!

Standard Dutch: [r] in all situations (even word final)
't Gooi dialect (which has popularized to include most of the Western part of the country, and most urban areas): [r], but [r\] word finally.
Leiden dialect: I'm unsure, but it sounds like they use [r\] in every situation...
Brabants, Limburgs, some south Holland dialects like Rotterdam, Den Haag (generally South Dutch, except Zeeland): [R\_+] (velar trill), which can sound like [x] word finally

The <g> is basically [x] (though more retracted than advanced), except that in words like <acht> 'eight' it can become [X]. It's basically a vague area somewhere between velar and uvular that can vary.
In southern accents (Brabant, Limburg, as well as all Flemish accents) the <g> is [G]. I believe it devoices in words like <acht>, becoming more like [c] than [x].

The area palatal-velar-uvular is all a gradient anyway.

dinnae wrote:The letter r is [ɾ] in all situations except [ɹ(ʲ)] syllable-finally.

What dialect are you talking about here? I don't think many dialects have [ɾ] do they?


JAL

sirdanilot wrote:Brabants, Limburgs, some south Holland dialects like Rotterdam, Den Haag (generally South Dutch, except Zeeland): [R\_+] (velar trill), which can sound like [x] word finally

I find the typical Rotterdam 'r' much more forward than the The Hague 'r', which is almost (if not entirely) identical to /X/.


JAL

jal wrote:

dinnae wrote:The letter r is [ɾ] in all situations except [ɹ(ʲ)] syllable-finally.

What dialect are you talking about here? I don't think many dialects have [ɾ] do they?


JAL

There are plenty of dialects that have a flap. They may seem more 'prevalent' to me because they strike me, I don't know. I can't say I've paid too much attention to the number of speakers with one.

dinnae wrote:There are plenty of dialects that have a flap. They may seem more 'prevalent' to me because they strike me, I don't know. I can't say I've paid too much attention to the number of speakers with one.

I'd love to see some evidence of that. Wikipedia doesn't list it as the standard for any dialect or accent (although I admit Wikipedia, especially the Dutch version, is often pretty bad).


JAL