Re: Nasality pa svenska

Hej,

Andreas skrev:
> > > >Heh :-) Now my accent is quite misleading, 'cause my _r_'s
> > > are uvular,
> > > >but of course they make my _rt_'s, _rd_'s, _rn_'s and _rs_'s
> > > >postalveolar...
> > >
> > > Postalveolar? Not that there's a world of acoustic difference, but
> > > prescriptively and following my lect they should be
> > > retroflex, along with /r/ itself.
> >
> >Hmph. Retroflex was indeed what I had gathered when reading the
> >descriptions a long time, when I never thought of learning
> Swedish, let
> >alone at Univeristy. When I came here, however, I tried to make those
> >_rt_'s and sundry retroflex, but it appeared it's not quite
> the thing. At
> >least on those tapes, and in the pronunciation of both our
> teachers (one of
> >whom is from Uppsala anyway).
>
> This sounds a bit odd to me.
>
> What're these people on the tape having for/C/ (as in
> _tjock_)? Many people
> (incl me) have [S] for it - do the tape people merge /C/ and /rs/?
Nope. We're keeping the sounds in _stjärna_, _köpa_ and _kurs_
separate....  or at least try to :-) I think I should say "I" here
rather than "we", but nevertheless.

> Uvular /r/ and lack of assmilation wouldn't be that bad from
> a foreigner in
> my mind. What'd I'd cringe to hear from a Russian is uvular /r/ and
> /r/+dental assimilating into a pure dental (ie, _sport_ and
> _spott_ become
> homphones, f'rinstance).
No, no, I never do that :-)

Tack,
Pavel
--
Pavel Iosad               pavel_iosad@mail.ru

Is mall a mharcaicheas am fear a bheachdaicheas
                 --Scottish proverb