Hi!
René Uittenbogaard <ruittenb@...> writes:
> On 1/16/06, Henrik Theiling <theiling@...> wrote:
>
> > with the side note that many dialects have [X] for /x/ and [R] for
> > /r/, so you get
> >
> > [X] vs [R] vs [XR]
> >
> > goot [XoU)t] - poured; gutter
> > rood [RoU)t] - red
> > groot [XRoU)t] - big
>
> My realisation of these tends to be:
>
> [XoU)t]
> [R\oU)t]
> [R\_0oU)t]
Funny, this much more like the labial tree-way distinction then. Very
nice.
>...
> And tongue-breaking for the two African men I know (one from Burundi,
> one from Congo) who are learning Dutch ATM. :-/ I'm trying to tell
> them to use [r] instead of [R\], but I can't pronounce [r].
I had to practice quite a while for the above triplet. But the Dutch
vowels pose a more severe problem to Germans as well: that the
original length distinction with secondary quality distinction (as it
is in German) is now a mainly quality-only distinction is really hard
to do. I found [i] vs [I] and [eI)] vs [EI)] really hardcore in
fluent speech:
_vies_ vs _vis_
_mee_ vs _mij_
> > Dutch has a /v/ vs. /v_0/ vs. /f/ distinction (at least in many
> > dialects. In others, mostly Southern, it's /w/ vs. /v/ vs. /f/,
>
> I don't know of any [v] realisations of |w|. I'd say:
>
> |w| - [w] or [v\]
> |v| - [v] or [v_0]
> |f| - [f]
Ah, ok.
Although the Dutch people I lived with were picky about my vowels, the
did not seem to notice I pronounced |w| as [v]. Perhaps it was close
enough. :-)
**Henrik
--
Relay 13 is forthcoming:
http://www.conlang.info/relay/relay13.html