Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
A very simple question for those of you who know more about the history of Dutch than I do: Why do we Dutch write <oe> for /u/, and not just <u> like the Germans do? What historical process is the source for this crosslinguistically strange orthography?
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
It's the same story as with English "oo" - Dutch "oe" is the continuation of a Germanic /o:/ that became /u(:)/ in several Western Gmc. languages independently. In High German, it happened earlier, via a diphthong /uo/ that is attested in OHG and MHG, while in English it happened during the Great Vowel shift.
Adding "e" and "i" was a way to indicate length in the late medieval / early modern orthographies of the North-Western German empire. You can still see that in German Place names like Soest ([zo:st]) or the toponyms in "-broich" (pronounced [bro:x] or [bru(:)x]) in the Niederrhein area. So we have:
Germanic *Go:D-
Old / Middle English, Old Saxon, Old Ripuarian and Middle Dutch /go:d/ or /Go:d/, written "good, god, goed, goid" in the various orthographies. This long /o:/ is still maintained in several Low German dialects.
OHG / MHG guot
NHG gut /gu:t/
New Engl. /gud/ written "good", Dutch /Gud/ written "goed".
Adding "e" and "i" was a way to indicate length in the late medieval / early modern orthographies of the North-Western German empire. You can still see that in German Place names like Soest ([zo:st]) or the toponyms in "-broich" (pronounced [bro:x] or [bru(:)x]) in the Niederrhein area. So we have:
Germanic *Go:D-
Old / Middle English, Old Saxon, Old Ripuarian and Middle Dutch /go:d/ or /Go:d/, written "good, god, goed, goid" in the various orthographies. This long /o:/ is still maintained in several Low German dialects.
OHG / MHG guot
NHG gut /gu:t/
New Engl. /gud/ written "good", Dutch /Gud/ written "goed".
- MisterBernie
- Avisaru
- Posts: 439
- Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 8:46 am
- Location: Oktoberfestonia
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
*adds Soest to the list of German places whose pronunciation I have to remember, like MeckPomm*hwhatting wrote:You can still see that in German Place names like Soest ([zo:st]) or the toponyms in "-broich" (pronounced [bro:x] or [bru(:)x]) in the Niederrhein area.
Constructed Voices - Another conlanging/conworlding blog.
Latest post: Joyful Birth of the Oiled One
Latest post: Joyful Birth of the Oiled One
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
*adds "Mecklenburg" to the list of German places whose pronunciation I have to remember, like "Soest"*MisterBernie wrote:*adds Soest to the list of German places whose pronunciation I have to remember, like MeckPomm*hwhatting wrote:You can still see that in German Place names like Soest ([zo:st]) or the toponyms in "-broich" (pronounced [bro:x] or [bru(:)x]) in the Niederrhein area.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
I heard that locals say /ˈmeːklənbʊrk/, since in Northern Germany Vck often marks a long vowel, but us uninformed foreigners down here say /ˈmɛklənbʊrk/, as it's spelled.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
This is more or less what I would have expected. Do you have a source for this? Perhaps something that goes a bit into details? I would really be interested in that.hwhatting wrote:It's the same story as with English "oo" - Dutch "oe" is the continuation of a Germanic /o:/ that became /u(:)/ in several Western Gmc. languages independently. In High German, it happened earlier, via a diphthong /uo/ that is attested in OHG and MHG, while in English it happened during the Great Vowel shift.
Adding "e" and "i" was a way to indicate length in the late medieval / early modern orthographies of the North-Western German empire. You can still see that in German Place names like Soest ([zo:st]) or the toponyms in "-broich" (pronounced [bro:x] or [bru(:)x]) in the Niederrhein area. So we have:
Germanic *Go:D-
Old / Middle English, Old Saxon, Old Ripuarian and Middle Dutch /go:d/ or /Go:d/, written "good, god, goed, goid" in the various orthographies. This long /o:/ is still maintained in several Low German dialects.
OHG / MHG guot
NHG gut /gu:t/
New Engl. /gud/ written "good", Dutch /Gud/ written "goed".
χʁɵn̩
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Anyway, the Dutch <u> is pronounced /y/, that's why they can't use it for /u/, am I right?
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Yes, Dutch <u> is indeed often used to represent /y/, although it can also be /ʏ/. So using it for /u/ as well would be confusing. That doesn't mean it can't in principle be used that way. But it isn't used that way except sometimes in loan words.Visinoid wrote:Anyway, the Dutch <u> is pronounced /y/, that's why they can't use it for /u/, am I right?
χʁɵn̩
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Almost exactly the same process whereby the French write <ou> for /u/ and <u> for /y/. Middle (?? or was it Old?) Dutch represented /u/ with <u>, and /o:/ with <oe>. /u/ became /y/, thus <u> came to represent /y/. /o:/ became /u/, and so <oe> came to represent /u/. This is all sensu lato, of course: the exact details of whether it was /y/, /y:/ or /ʏ/ aren't significant.merijn wrote:A very simple question for those of you who know more about the history of Dutch than I do: Why do we Dutch write <oe> for /u/, and not just <u> like the Germans do? What historical process is the source for this crosslinguistically strange orthography?
Salmoneus wrote:(NB Dewrad is behaving like an adult - a petty, sarcastic and uncharitable adult, admittedly, but none the less note the infinitely higher quality of flame)
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
seems to me to be an exceedingly common change, at least in Europe. at the very least I can already see Swedish and Greek having done the same.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Those are all bits and pieces I remember from various sources. And most of my books on historical linguistics are in Germany, so I can't even start to look them up. Always a good source on German historical developments is the dtv Atlas zur deutschen Sprache. It also covers the developments from PIE to Western Germanic and sometimes also treats Dutch matters in passing. IIRC, the information about "e" and "i" being used to indicate lengthening I have from Hans Eggers' "Deutsche Sprachgeschichte" - at the back of each volume he has a section with sample texts from the respective periods and he mentions this orthographical convention when discussing a medieval or early Modern German text from Cologne.Grunnen wrote:This is more or less what I would have expected. Do you have a source for this? Perhaps something that goes a bit into details? I would really be interested in that.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Brythonic as well. That's why u is /ɨ/ in Welsh and w had to be pressed into service for /u/.finlay wrote:seems to me to be an exceedingly common change, at least in Europe. at the very least I can already see Swedish and Greek having done the same.
Outside of Europe, there's Dhegiha Siouan. In Omaha-Ponca, you have a complete merger of /u/ and /i/ (as in the Romance variety Surselvan) whereas Kansa and Osage have a strongly-fronted /u/ and an /o/ that can be realised as [ʊ].
- Skomakar'n
- Smeric
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
And Faroese goes the other way around, using short ‹í ý› for /ʊi/, and long for /ʊi(j)/. It also has short ‹ú› as /ɪ/ and short ‹ó› as /ɛ/ in certain environments.linguoboy wrote:Brythonic as well. That's why u is /ɨ/ in Welsh and w had to be pressed into service for /u/.finlay wrote:seems to me to be an exceedingly common change, at least in Europe. at the very least I can already see Swedish and Greek having done the same.
Outside of Europe, there's Dhegiha Siouan. In Omaha-Ponca, you have a complete merger of /u/ and /i/ (as in the Romance variety Surselvan) whereas Kansa and Osage have a strongly-fronted /u/ and an /o/ that can be realised as [ʊ].
Last edited by Skomakar'n on Sat Nov 19, 2011 4:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Online dictionary for my conlang Vanga: http://royalrailway.com/tungumaalMiin/Vanga/
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Thanks!hwhatting wrote:Those are ... from Cologne.
χʁɵn̩
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
gʁonɛ̃g
gɾɪ̃slɑ̃
- Salmoneus
- Sanno
- Posts: 3197
- Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 5:00 pm
- Location: One of the dark places of the world
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Another example: English. Well, future-English: /u/ is quite fronted in many dialects (and completely fronted in some). I think it's only a matter of time before /@U/ is .linguoboy wrote:Brythonic as well. That's why u is /ɨ/ in Welsh and w had to be pressed into service for /u/.finlay wrote:seems to me to be an exceedingly common change, at least in Europe. at the very least I can already see Swedish and Greek having done the same.
Outside of Europe, there's Dhegiha Siouan. In Omaha-Ponca, you have a complete merger of /u/ and /i/ (as in the Romance variety Surselvan) whereas Kansa and Osage have a strongly-fronted /u/ and an /o/ that can be realised as [ʊ].
Blog: [url]http://vacuouswastrel.wordpress.com/[/url]
But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!
But the river tripped on her by and by, lapping
as though her heart was brook: Why, why, why! Weh, O weh
I'se so silly to be flowing but I no canna stay!
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
what, reversing the diphthongisation or something?
In the context of Scottish accents, I think I already hear as /o/ because /u/ is almost never a back vowel (it's almost never a back vowel in England either, but it's more stereotypical in Scotland or something). I remember an Italian girl I taught one time who was called Giusy, but I always heard it as if it was Josie with a strong Scottish accent. Certainly, vocalised L can become or [o] as well as [w].
In the context of Scottish accents, I think I already hear as /o/ because /u/ is almost never a back vowel (it's almost never a back vowel in England either, but it's more stereotypical in Scotland or something). I remember an Italian girl I taught one time who was called Giusy, but I always heard it as if it was Josie with a strong Scottish accent. Certainly, vocalised L can become or [o] as well as [w].
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Salmoneus wrote:Another example: English. Well, future-English: /u/ is quite fronted in many dialects (and completely fronted in some). I think it's only a matter of time before /@U/ is .linguoboy wrote:Brythonic as well. That's why u is /ɨ/ in Welsh and w had to be pressed into service for /u/.finlay wrote:seems to me to be an exceedingly common change, at least in Europe. at the very least I can already see Swedish and Greek having done the same.
Outside of Europe, there's Dhegiha Siouan. In Omaha-Ponca, you have a complete merger of /u/ and /i/ (as in the Romance variety Surselvan) whereas Kansa and Osage have a strongly-fronted /u/ and an /o/ that can be realised as [ʊ].
Seconded, at least for the fronting of /uː/ and /ʊ/, which at least over here in North American English is well on its way, and likely complete in some varieties. (It should not be hard to find NAE varieties that actually consistently have [y(ː)] and/or [ʏ] therefor, particularly from what I have heard of NAE varieties along the West Coast. I have even heard NAE speakers who have gone another step and unrounded unstressed [ʏ] from /ʊ/ to [ɪ]...)
(My own dialect is actually highly atypical in that it preserves back realizations of both in most positions, but even it shows clear evidence of this in places, especially between coronals, but also to a lesser extent adjacent to them.)
On the other hand, in NAE I have seen very little evidence for any raising of /oʊ̯/ to a high monophthong; rather the two main changes seen are either monophthongizing it to a mid-high monophthong [o(ː)] or opening, unrounding, and fronting it to something like [ɐʊ̯] or even [ɛʊ̯] (and possibly centralizing the offglide as well). If anything, in many varieties in probably the coming century or so I would expect it to gradually merge with /aʊ̯/ (which already is commonly realized as something like [æʊ̯]).
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
I've met people who have a full-on [ɛʊ̯] for /aʊ̯/.Travis B. wrote:On the other hand, in NAE I have seen very little evidence for any raising of /oʊ̯/ to a high monophthong; rather the two main changes seen are either monophthongizing it to a mid-high monophthong [o(ː)] or opening, unrounding, and fronting it to something like [ɐʊ̯] or even [ɛʊ̯] (and possibly centralizing the offglide as well). If anything, in many varieties in probably the coming century or so I would expect it to gradually merge with /aʊ̯/ (which already is commonly realized as something like [æʊ̯]).
(bout-boat(-belt) merger?)
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
[eʊ̯] is consider typical of Balmorese. My grandma talked like that, but the nucleus seems a bit more retracted in my father's speech, perhaps [ɘʊ̯]?Travis B. wrote:On the other hand, in NAE I have seen very little evidence for any raising of /oʊ̯/ to a high monophthong; rather the two main changes seen are either monophthongizing it to a mid-high monophthong [o(ː)] or opening, unrounding, and fronting it to something like [ɐʊ̯] or even [ɛʊ̯] (and possibly centralizing the offglide as well). If anything, in many varieties in probably the coming century or so I would expect it to gradually merge with /aʊ̯/ (which already is commonly realized as something like [æʊ̯]).
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Regardless, it is easy to predict from this standpoint that a large portion of NAE will essentially lack non-low back monophthongs, except for the [ɔ] found as part of /or/, and a larger portion of NAE will lack high and near-high back monophthongs. (And then dialects like my own will be in the "weird relict" category of NAE varieties in this regard...)linguoboy wrote:[eʊ̯] is consider typical of Balmorese. My grandma talked like that, but the nucleus seems a bit more retracted in my father's speech, perhaps [ɘʊ̯]?Travis B. wrote:On the other hand, in NAE I have seen very little evidence for any raising of /oʊ̯/ to a high monophthong; rather the two main changes seen are either monophthongizing it to a mid-high monophthong [o(ː)] or opening, unrounding, and fronting it to something like [ɐʊ̯] or even [ɛʊ̯] (and possibly centralizing the offglide as well). If anything, in many varieties in probably the coming century or so I would expect it to gradually merge with /aʊ̯/ (which already is commonly realized as something like [æʊ̯]).
Dibotahamdn duthma jallni agaynni ra hgitn lakrhmi.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
Amuhawr jalla vowa vta hlakrhi hdm duthmi xaja.
Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro. Irdro.
- Nortaneous
- Sumerul
- Posts: 4544
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 1:52 am
- Location: the Imperial Corridor
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
edit: I should probably mention that the bout-boat merger is not likely in some dialects (at least IMD), because /au/ is monophthongizing to [æː]. ([æə̯] IMI)
Do any of those dialects not seem like they're headed in the direction of at least developing [o] from /ol/ (and some /o/ in some dialects, e.g. 'both')?Travis B. wrote:Regardless, it is easy to predict from this standpoint that a large portion of NAE will essentially lack non-low back monophthongs, except for the [ɔ] found as part of /or/, and a larger portion of NAE will lack high and near-high back monophthongs.
Siöö jandeng raiglin zåbei tandiüłåd;
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
nää džunnfin kukuch vklaivei sivei tåd.
Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei. Chei.
- johanpeturdam
- Sanci
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:32 pm
- Location: Bratislava, Slovakia, originally: Funningur, Faroe Islands
- Contact:
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Well, almost:
This is dialectical and limited to North Streymoy, but it's dying out. Short í/ý otherwise is /ʊi/ and long is /ʊi:/.Skomakar'n wrote:And Faroese goes the other way around, using short ‹í ý› for /ʊ/, and long for /ʊi(j)/.
Only when before -gv, and in the dialects of Suðuroy, the latter doesn't change, so there: <ógv> [ɔkf].Skomakar'n wrote:It also has short ‹ú› as /ɪ/ and short ‹ó› as /ɛ/.
Ungur nemur, gamal fremur
Da giovani si impara, da adulti si applica
Da giovani si impara, da adulti si applica
- Skomakar'n
- Smeric
- Posts: 1273
- Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:05 pm
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
... I'm stupid. I know perfectly well to pronounce, say, ‹nýtt› as /nʊit/, so I don't know what I was thinking.johanpeturdam wrote:Well, almost:
This is dialectical and limited to North Streymoy, but it's dying out. Short í/ý otherwise is /ʊi/ and long is /ʊi:/.Skomakar'n wrote:And Faroese goes the other way around, using short ‹í ý› for /ʊ/, and long for /ʊi(j)/.
I know, but it does happen!johanpeturdam wrote:Only when before -gv, and in the dialects of Suðuroy, the latter doesn't change, so there: <ógv> [ɔkf].Skomakar'n wrote:It also has short ‹ú› as /ɪ/ and short ‹ó› as /ɛ/.
Online dictionary for my conlang Vanga: http://royalrailway.com/tungumaalMiin/Vanga/
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
#undef FEMALE
I'd love for you to try my game out! Here's the forum thread about it:
http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=36688
Of an Ernst'ian one.
- johanpeturdam
- Sanci
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 9:32 pm
- Location: Bratislava, Slovakia, originally: Funningur, Faroe Islands
- Contact:
Re: Dutch <oe> (where does it come from)?
Well, it should actually be [nʊiʰt:]. The <nýt> is [nʊi:t] or [nʊi:ʰt], if you speak my dialect.Skomakar'n wrote:... I'm stupid. I know perfectly well to pronounce, say, ‹nýtt› as /nʊit/, so I don't know what I was thinking.johanpeturdam wrote:Well, almost:
This is dialectical and limited to North Streymoy, but it's dying out. Short í/ý otherwise is /ʊi/ and long is /ʊi:/.Skomakar'n wrote:And Faroese goes the other way around, using short ‹í ý› for /ʊ/, and long for /ʊi(j)/.
Indeed.Skomakar'n wrote:I know, but it does happen!johanpeturdam wrote:Only when before -gv, and in the dialects of Suðuroy, the latter doesn't change, so there: <ógv> [ɔkf].Skomakar'n wrote:It also has short ‹ú› as /ɪ/ and short ‹ó› as /ɛ/.
Ungur nemur, gamal fremur
Da giovani si impara, da adulti si applica
Da giovani si impara, da adulti si applica