Re: Further language development Q's

Quoting Steven Williams <feurieaux@...>:

>  --- Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> a écrit :
> > Quoting Steven Williams <feurieaux@...>:
> >
> > > It's fairly simple. German, for example, had (up
> > to
> > > the sixteenth century), [r]. It's still pronounced
> > > that way in some dialects, I believe, and it's
> > also
> > > common in some 'old-fashioned' speech, like
> > operas,
> > > where [r] is seen as more 'melodic'. After about
> > the
> > > sixteenth century, the German [r] shifted to [R],
> > > either because [R] is easier to articulate than
> > [r]
> > > (it is, at least for me), or from influence from
> > > French (this sounds doubtful to me).
> >
> > FWIW, the French influence is the explanation I've
> > always heard. It's also been
> > made responsible for the use of uvular r's in Dutch
> > and in southern
> > Scandinavian dialects.
>
> Hmmph, so I'm wrong. Not the first time :).
>
> > For me, [r] comes easier than [R]. Neither occurs in
> > my native 'lect.
>
> Interesting; you're Swedish-born, right? Which rhotic
> does your native dialect have? [4]? I'm afraid my
> knowledge of Swedish is pathetically nil.
My /r/ is normally a retroflex trill or approximant - the trilled pronunciation
is naturally more prevalent in careful speech. X-SAMPA and CXS denote the
approximant as [r\`], but do not deign to supply a symbol for the trill - my
own  JXS scheme uses [r`] (which in X-SAMPA/CXS means a retroflex tap or flap -
JXS uses [4`] for that).

In rapid speech, it may become a fricative; [z`].

Calling my native 'lect a "_dia_lect" might be stretching the term - my parents
come from different regions, and I moved around alot as a kid. The result is a
mix pretty close to the standard, which most people find non-localizable beyond
the fact that I'm neither from Scania nor from Norrland.

                                              Andreas