Re: Language Change
|From:||Irina Rempt <ira@...>|
|Date:||Tuesday, January 11, 2000, 9:46|
On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Nik Taylor wrote:
> Well, presumably, since there's an "n", there used to be a pronounced
> /n/. Could it be merely an archaism?
It might; or a bona fide dialectal variation; or pedantry or spelling
There are cases in which there *never* was a pronounced /n/ and the
new spelling made us put in an "n" because everything had to be
consistent: "kerkenraad" (superseding the much more logical
"kerkeraad") for "church council" when everyone who thinks about it
concludes that it can only mean "churches' council". I'm afraid
people will start to put the /n/ in now it's written, and insist on
everybody doing that.
There are letters to the editor in the paper every few months whining
that "those young people don't know how to pronounce their own
language: they're too lazy to pronounce every letter!" Very
exasperating, and I always feel called to reply but don't because
it's no use.
(Disclaimer: that Dutch is my native language doesn't mean I know
everything about it)
Varsinen an laynynay, saraz no arlet rastynay.
firstname.lastname@example.org (myself) - http://valdyas.conlang.org (Valdyas)