Re: "y" and "r"

At 12:24 pm -0800 28/3/01, J Matthew Pearson wrote:
>Raymond Brown wrote, about Uusisuom:
>
>> We are told that "pronunciation of the letters is similar to English, with
>> these exceptions:
>> .....
>> y = pronounced like 'oo' as in 'bOOt'."
>>
>> This unequivocably means that {y} = [u]; I assume {u} does not have the
>> same sound and that "similar to English" must mean that {u} = [V], i.e. the
>> 'u' in American & southern British 'but'.
>
>Isn't [u] fronted in Scottish dialects of English, giving "boot" = [by:t]?  My
>guess is that either the author of Uusisuom has Scottish in mind
>(unlikely), or
>he is mistaken on how the "oo" in "boot" is pronounced in Standard English.
Highland Scots is uniformally [u].  Lowland Scots dialects have varieties
ranging from the back [u], through the high central [}] (Swedish /u/) to
[y].

John Cowan suggested that Daniel had, in fact, done just what you suggest,
i.e. that Uusisuom {u} = [u] anf {y} = [y].  It is certainly neat.

But quite frankly I find the likelihood of mistaking English 'oo' in 'bOOt'
for [y] rather than [u] surprising to say the least.  The information the
author actually gives must surely mean, if taken literally, {u} = [V] and
{y} = [u], tho like you & John I find this strange.

>
>> I'm less familiar with Russian.  My understanding is that the apical trill
>> was the norm, but that uvular /r/, now common in German as well as French,
>> is becoming common among younger speakers - but I may be wrong.
>
>I've never heard the Russian "r" pronounced as anything but a trill/flap.
Well, I did say I may be wrong.  Certainly I'd always understood that
Russian /r/ was the apical trill or flap; but I'd recently been informed
that a uvular pronunciation is heard among the young.  But that may well
either be disinformation or a fad among a certain group of Russian young -
I don't know.

At any rate, it is confusing, to say the least, to suggest that French &
Russian /r/ are the same.

Ray.



=========================================
A mind which thinks at its own expense
will always interfere with language.
                   [J.G. Hamann 1760]
=========================================

Replies