<ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Moderator: Aurinĭa

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

<ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-21, 21:30

Hi everyone!
Sorry if this may seem like a silly question, but I've already looked for an answer to this in a LOT of pages but couldn't find it anywhere.
I keep hearing <ij> and <ei> pronounced clearly as [aj] in pretty much every single song (Netherlads Dutch) I listen to, but everywhere I look, the same grapheme seems to be either phonemically transcribed as /ɛi/ or /ɛ:/, or simply put in phonetic notation as [ɛj], [ɛi] or [ɛ:] - or yet, maybe more precisely, [æj]. Now, since I'm a native speaker of Brazilian Portuguese, I know I could be somehow misinterpreting an [æ] as an [a], since the first isn't present on my mother tongue, but I'm PRETTY SURE the sound I'm hearing IS in fact an [aj]. Besides, we here usually take an [æ] for an [ɛ], not for an [a], for instance: English "bad" & "bed" sound pretty much the same to many of us.
Anyways, 2 examples of the [aj] thing: "Jij Bent Zo" by Jeroen van der Boom (specially and more clearly the "jij" in the first sentence of the lyrics) and "Blijf Je Vanavond (Bij Mij)" by Monique Smit (throughout the whole song).
So, is this a "real" pronunciation of that grapheme or am I mistaken? If it is really an [aj], is this only a "sung thing", or is it usually spoken like that? If the latter, how common and how "standard" is this in both the Netherlands and in Belgium?

Dank je veel,
XVoX.

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-22, 1:04

You're absolutely right about Monique Smit, I think about Jeroen van der Boom a little less so. It's historical linguistics in action we're observing here. I think [ɛi] may even sound somewhat old fashioned by now, [æi] is the most common and standard pronunciation and [ai] pops up every now and then. To me, it is still a very marked pronunciation, but I think it's gaining ground. The Smit's are an interesting case in point. Her (somewhat older) brother Jan's <ei>/<ij> are also quite open, but not to Monique's extent. Monique has also lost her coda r's (wannee je na me kaaikt). You're listening to the Dutch of the next generation. 8-) Of the Netherlands, that is. I'm sure Belgium doesn't participate in this development.
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-22, 1:30

Actually, I think the first element of Monique's ij/ei may be something between [æ] and [a], which is the exact value of standard Dutch aa. Her own aa's, however, range from this pronunciation to a pure [a]. :hmm: Interesting.
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-22, 21:48

Thank you very much for all your help and useful info, Dminor! :)
Jeroen's realization of <ei> & <ij> really seem to be more in the spectrum between [ɛj] and [æj], while Monique's seem be between [æj] and [aj]. And what you said about the new generation of the Netherlands is very interesting and relevant, if we think that Jeroen is older than her brother, which, in turn, is older than her, and their realization of these phonemes seem to be more or less open as we gradually move from the older towards the younger, i.e., respectively, [ɛj] > [æj] > [aj]. I mean, obviously, not as rule, but the phenomenon itself is very interesting for those who, like myself, love historical linguistics, as you pointed out. Oh! And one thing I noticed too, is that the more open sound ([æ] for Jeroen and [a] for Monique) seem to happen more frequently in the vicinity of similar sounds, such as [a] or schwas. I wonder if we'll eventually see the [aj] becoming the "standard" realization of these in the Netherlands (especially in the North), as in German "sein" ~ Dutch "zijn", Ger. "mein" ~Du. "mijn", etc.... Maybe this could be an unconscious attempt by the native speakers to determine even more clearly the difference between these phonemes and the pronunciation of <ee>, which seem to be becoming more diphthonged and even a little bit more open? :hmm: But I digress to much... :D
Anyway, since the [æj] sound is still a little bit awkward for me to pronounce, which realization would you think it'd be the "best" for me to use in informal situations until I get used to saying [æj] in fast speech, the [ɛj] or the [aj]?

Dank je wederom veel,
XVoX.

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-23, 1:52

To complicate matters just a bit, the beautiful generation picture we have now created is of course a little more confused in reality. :P Listen for example to this extremely open realisation (at 0:25). I was flabbergasted when I first heared it; during the [a::::] I really expected the word to be straalt or something. :D Anyway, this guy is of Jeroens age. The fact that both this J and Monique (and I've noted it in the speech and songs of Nick & Simon too) are from Volendam may have something to do with it, although this extent of openness is by no means restricted to Volendam. No doubt these very people contribute(d) to its further spreading, though.

Your observation about the [a]-realisation in a similar environment is interesting and a priori possible (although I don't see how [a] would be closer to schwa than [ɛ]), but I can't say I share the impression. :hmm: To me it seems that [aj] shows up more frequently when the word has more stress or intensity. This makes some sense phonetically as well, since it takes more effort to open the mouth entirely to produce [a]. Cf. e.g. Monique's first sentence, which I think I'd transcribe as [jaj ka̞jkt na mæj] (so with three different qualities of the first element). She gradually seems to become more relaxed during the sentence (but maybe I have this impression exactly because of the differences in vowel quality, who knows :P).

Anyway, I think you're right about the diphthongisation of ee being a probable motive for this change.

As for what you yourself should aim for, if [æj] is not an option, I think the second best option would still be [ɛj]. As I said [aj] is still very marked, at least to me. But if you're inclined to produce a more closed sound similar to [e] for [ɛ] (I don't know if your native language has an opposition between these two), confusion could arise whether you meant ee or ei/ij.

By the way, if you want to hear an example of the other end of the ei/ij spectrum, i.e. a realisation close to [ej], listen to drs. P. :D
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

User avatar
Muisje
Posts: 1520
Joined: 2009-12-13, 13:04
Real Name: Anne
Gender: female
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Muisje » 2011-02-23, 10:31

When I try to consciously pronounce ɛ + i I get something that sounds like a slightly old-fashioned ei/ij to me :P Still like Dminor said, it's better than [ai], that one's very stereotyped. But don't copy all of drs. P's pronunciation, it'll make you sound like you're from the 50s or something. :P

I don't know what's causing it to shift now, but really it's just a continuation of an already existing sound change - all ij's used to be [i:] in Middle Dutch, it diphtongized and merged with ei. In English and German it has already become [ɑi] or something like it (mine, mein), there's no reason why that couldn't happen in Dutch. (I was told once the only reason it hasn't happened yet is because [ɛi] was seen as more prestigious, unique to the Dutch language.)

As for [ɛ:], that's a Belgian pronunciation, and some Dutch city dialects have it too (like Den Haag), but it's definitely not standard.

XVoX wrote:Now, since I'm a native speaker of Brazilian Portuguese, I know I could be somehow misinterpreting an [æ] as an [a], since the first isn't present on my mother tongue, but I'm PRETTY SURE the sound I'm hearing IS in fact an [aj]. Besides, we here usually take an [æ] for an [ɛ], not for an [a], for instance: English "bad" & "bed" sound pretty much the same to many of us.
Dutch doesn't have [æ] as a phoneme either so the bad/bed thing happens here as well (and it includes bat and bet because of final devoicing :P ). The thing is, English [æ]'s I only confuse with [ɛ], but in Finnish they sometimes sound more like [a] to me. [æ] is on the border between the two sounds, so my mind doesn't know how to deal with it, when it's only a tiny bit more open than I'm used to it turns into an [a] for me - but it still is an [æ].
you either lose your fear
or spend your life
with one foot in the grave
over the rhine - spark

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-23, 19:34

Thank you very much, Dminor and Muisje, for all your help!
Dminor, as for our little panorama of "generational linguistics", I just knew it couldn't be that easy, hehehe... :D From what you said, it really may have started as only a Volendam thing, but seems to be now gradually spreading because (or at least with the help) of the exposure these and many other artists with similar accents get on the media.
I think you're right about the conditions under which [aj] appears: after reading your and Muisje's comments here, I listened to the songs again and it really seems to be a way to focus or stress those specific words or syllables in the sentences, and as we move away from the focus, the mouth seems to relax more and more towards the "standard" [æj] again.
The diphthongization of <ee> may really have something to do with this, as you said, 'cause I keep hearing it a little bit more open, especially near /n/, like in "alleen", for instance. I wonder if there's an underlying chain shift going on that we still cannot quite realize, especially taking in consideration what Muisje said about this being the continuation of an ongoing sound change, and the fact that I keep seeing phonemic transcriptions that don't seem to "fit" the phonetic realizations that I'm hearing, for instance (in Netherlandic Dutch):
<ee> = /e:/, but what I hear is (usually) [e(:)j] or [i:] before an /r/
<oo> = /o:/, but what I hear is [o(:)w] or [ɔ:] before an /r/
<eu> = /ø:/, but I hear [ø(:)ɥ] or [ø:] before an /r/
<au(w)> or <ou(w)> = /au/; this one I sometimes perceive as [aw] and sometimes as [ʌw]; which one do you think is the most usual realization?
<ui> = /œy/; this is one that seems to be the most different: I either hear [ʌɥ] or [aɥ]; am I correct in any of these two?
And one other thing: the first sound in <au(w)>/<ou(w)> and <ui> seem to be now the same: does that make sense to you?
As for my realization of <ei>/<ij>, I think I'm gonna try something as a "lowered" [ɛj], so I can gradually get used to the [æj] - and not sound like I just got out of a time machine, as Muisje said! :D
Oh! And in my language we do have the opposition between [ɛ] and [e], so that's not a problem... And I think I'm going to avoid the [ej] pronunciation of <ei>/<ij>, otherwise I risk being unintelligible, hehehe... :lol:
As for the [ɛ:], funny thing is the Belgian pronunciation seems, in general, easier for me mimic, but the three gender system kinda scares me - I'm gonna have enough problem with that already by the middle of this year, when I try and learn German again... But I might one of these days try and train a Belgian pronunciation, 'cause it sounds very beautiful too! :)
And finally, I think the [æ]/[ɛ]/[a] was exactly what happened to me too, Muisje: the English one also sounds like an [ɛ] to me, but the Dutch one, sounds like [a] to my ears. Maybe the latter is a tiny bit more open than the former, as you said about the Finnish, but it's still an [æ]! :)

Anyways,
Dank je (of jullie? :-P) veel,
XVoX.

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-23, 19:54

P.S.: I think my perception of an [a] being closer to schwa than [ɛ] was, once again, a textbook case of interference: in my language - or more particularly, in my dialect (Mineiro) we usually realize post-tonic /a/ as a schwa or not at all, while /ɛ/ only happens in tonic positions; the non-tonic version becomes an [ɪ] or nothing, for instance: Br. Port. "casa" ("house") is usually pronounced as ['ca.zɐ], but in my dialect, it's usually ['ca.z(ə)]; Br. Port. "pede" ("you/he/she asks") is usually ['pɛ.d͡ʑɪ], but in my dialect, it's either the former, ['pɛd͡ʑ] or even [['pɛt͡ʃ] before an unvoiced consonant. :)

User avatar
Muisje
Posts: 1520
Joined: 2009-12-13, 13:04
Real Name: Anne
Gender: female
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Muisje » 2011-02-23, 20:44

XVoX wrote:<ee> = /e:/, but what I hear is (usually) [e(:)j] or [i:] before an /r/
<oo> = /o:/, but what I hear is [o(:)w] or [ɔ:] before an /r/
<eu> = /ø:/, but I hear [ø(:)ɥ] or [ø:] before an /r/
<au(w)> or <ou(w)> = /au/; this one I sometimes perceive as [aw] and sometimes as [ʌw]; which one do you think is the most usual realization?
<ui> = /œy/; this is one that seems to be the most different: I either hear [ʌɥ] or [aɥ]; am I correct in any of these two?
And one other thing: the first sound in <au(w)>/<ou(w)> and <ui> seem to be now the same: does that make sense to you?
The thing with phonemic transcriptions is that they show the underlying phoneme, not necessarily the actual pronunciation :wink: I think you're pretty right with what you hear. This is what I've seen as phonetic transcriptions (not that I have that much experience, but still :P ):
/e:/ = [ei], [ej], [ɪˑə] before r (definitely not [i], 'meer' and 'mier' don't sound the same)
/o:/ = [ou], [ow], [ɔˑə] before r
/ø:/ = [øy], [øˑə] before r
/au/ = [au], [aw], [ʌu], [ʌw] - I think they both occur, I have no idea which one is more common, I don't hear the difference unless I listen very closely and even then it's vague
/œy/ = [œy]
I have absolutely no idea what the difference is between [y] and [ɥ] except that the last one is an approximant, is it just like [u] and [w]? because there's not much of a difference between those in diphthongs as far as I know (I'm not a phonetician :P ).
The schwa thing in the diphthongs before r is very short, I'm not sure how to transcribe it. But it really is there. They're also pronounced that way before an l in the same syllable, by the way.
I think for me at least the first sounds in /au/ and /œy/ are not exactly the same, but the biggest difference between the two is in the second part anyway. When I try to pronounce /œy/ with an /a/ it doesn't sound too strange (the other way around does). I have noticed though that the beginning sound of /œy/ is not as rounded as that of /øy/ - maybe this is an attempt to distinguish between them better?
you either lose your fear
or spend your life
with one foot in the grave
over the rhine - spark

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-24, 23:04

In the train today I heard a woman, I'd say in her early 40's, with [aj] for ei/ij and [ɛj] (!) for ee (and something like [ʌw] for oo). :mrgreen: She had a really shrill voice, too, it was quite horrendous. People like her rather than Volendam may be the origin of the new sounds, at least if we want to believe a Dutch (socio)linguist, Jan Stroop, who claims to have "discovered" the new, more open realisations of especially ei/ij as [aj], and also of au/ou and ui. He thinks the lowering phenomenon started among succesful, educated women in their 40's. His name for this variant of Dutch is Poldernederlands and in his view it is indeed the Dutch of the future. Here you can find his site dedicated to it.

Anyway, I'd say my own realisations are

ee = [eɪ], [ej], before r/l [ɪ:], [ɪˑə]
oo = [oʊ], [ow], before r/l [o:], [oˑə] (a little more open maybe, but it seems to be closer to [o] than to [ɔ])
eu = probably [øʉ], before r [ø:], [øˑə]
au/ou = [ɑw]
ui = not /œy/, that's for people over 60. On close inspection I think it may be [ɐʉ]. Hey, that actually makes sense, like this it can be considered the central equivalent of ei/ij /æj/ (be it with the second element (mostly) rounded in ui). :D In any case the first element is not identical to the first element of au/ou for me.

In ee, oo, and eu the second vowel should mostly be an offglide rather than a real second vowel, so don't overdo it: sometimes the second element is more of an aim that isn't really reached, and in quick speech they may even be realised as monophthongs.

I think this situation is pretty average and normal. People are never able to pinpoint me on a map (or a particular social group) based on my speech :P
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-26, 18:46

I spoke to a professor of historical Dutch linguistics yesterday, and he didn't really like Stroop's claims and term, since the term is based on this women first thing (Stroop even sees in it the final step of the feminist movement...), and a recent dissertation states that this was probably not the case. Also, the pronunciation of ei/ij as [aj] is way older, since it is already mentioned in the first grammar of Dutch (the Twe-spraack vande Nederduitsche letterkunst), published in 1584! He also told me the development has already made another step in some areas of the province of Noord-Holland: ee now is [aj], while ei/ij is [ɔj]! :mrgreen:
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-26, 23:32

Thank you once again for all your kind help, Dminor and Muisje, and sorry for taking so long to reply! :)
Muisje, my main problem was precisely that while I was looking for phonetic transcriptions of these sounds, pretty much all I could find were the phonemic values of these graphemes put between square brackets to represent the phonetic ones - or at least that's what I thought it was happening, since the actual realizations were reasonably different from these... Or more likely, the people responsible for these sites were simply passing on the values that they were taught these diphthongs and long vowels "should" have, which usually means these are not accurate representations of the sounds NOW, but how these sounded when the materials in question were written. I kept facing the same problem, for instance, when I first started studying French: every single time I went looking for the transcription to the phonetic realizations of the <un> and <in> graphemes - and in most of the sites I visit until now, these were represented respectively as [œ̃] and [ɛ̃], while not only to every single college professor and colleague of mine in the Linguistics field, but also every time I heard any (French) native speaker, both of these sounds had merged into something clearly MUCH closer to an [ã] or even an nasal [æ]. Oh! And about the [ɥ], you're right: [ɥ] is for [y] what [w] is for [u]. :D
Dminor, while I clearly (and obviously:)) can not say anything about the origin or social aspects of the Poldernederlands and find it... well, let's say "peculiar" that Mr. Stroop claims to have discovered something that was registered in writing in 1584 :lol: , one thing I can say is that his(?) view on what's happening to the "long vowels" and diphthongs in (Nethelandic) Dutch, just as what you said, seems to have become really widespread and to be still growing, since, with the exception of his perception of the lowering of the "long vowels", which is still just something that "pops up" here and there between their most common pronunciation, your realization of <ei> or <ij> as [æj], <ui> as something like [ɐʉ] and <au> and <ou> as [ɑw] appear to have become sort of like "the rule", when it comes to songs (in Netherlandic) and a lot of short clips of spoken Dutch I've seen around - and that's when they're not realized as Mr. Stroop transcribed there, in his site! :) As you said in your post, this makes sense for turning <ui> in somewhat as a centralized version of <ei>/<ij>, but it also gives the whole "long vowel"/diphthong system a lot more "balance", at least from my point of view, take a look: (In the next post:))

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-02-27, 0:12



FRONTCENTRAL*BACK
<ee>=[ej]*<oo>=[ow]
<ei>/<ij>=[æj]<ui>=[ɐʉ]<au>/<ou>=[ɑw]

*I didn't include <eu>=[øʉ] in the CENTRAL column because the first sound of this diphthong isn't actually a central vowel and the second one could be realized as an [y] or an [ɥ]. When realized as you do, however, it does have a centralized/centralizing aspect, since the end vowel/glide is clearly central. Oh! And I got what you said about not overdoing the glides in the "long vowels"... After all, they're still called "long vowels" and not diphthongs for a reason, right? :D
Anyway, very interesting what your professor said about this even further stage of development! :) But if what we're now discussing took some 420 years to become closer to "standard" status, I wonder how long will it take for the changes he mentioned be close to be recognized as such! :mrgreen:
One thing you mentioned earlier, Dminor, made me wonder: if <aa> is now pronounced closer to an [æ] and <ei>/<ij> as an [æj], how do you - and Muisje too :) - realize the "short e", the <e>? And if <aa> is not that close to an [æ] to you, how would you transcribe it? And also, how would you guys transcribe your realization of the "short u", the <u>? Something like an [ʉ]? 'Cause I've seen it represented as everything from a schwa, to an [y], to an [ɵ]... :?

Anyhow, once again,
Dank je veel,
XVoX.

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-27, 18:18

Yeah, that looks pretty neat. :D

I'd transcribe <aa> as [a̝]. Right in between [a] and [æ].

As for <u> (in closed syllable), yeah, what is that. :hmm: [œ], [ɞ] and [əʷ] are all candidates, and maybe all of them are used. It's definitely not [y]. [ɵ] seems to be too closed.

At least the other short vowels are pretty clear :P

ie [i]
i [ɪ]
e [ɛ]
a [ɑ]
o [ɔ] (some claim the old difference between [ɔ] and [o] can still be heard phonetically, but I doubt it. In any case it's only one phoneme)
oe [u]

So <e> in closed syllable is still firmly at its place and does not, at least to my knowledge, have any tendency to become anything else in standard Dutch. In the south (? at least in Nijmegen and environment) you can hear [æ] for <e> though, but this is part of an entire vowel shift. :D
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

User avatar
Muisje
Posts: 1520
Joined: 2009-12-13, 13:04
Real Name: Anne
Gender: female
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Muisje » 2011-02-27, 19:31

Dminor wrote:o [ɔ] (some claim the old difference between [ɔ] and [o] can still be heard phonetically, but I doubt it. In any case it's only one phoneme)
When I was writing a paper about Frisian (which has both [ɔ] and [o]) my dad (who is Frisian) tried to explain the difference with 'one is the vowel in top and the other in op'. But to me they sounded the same which surprised him very much. After having him repeat them a couple times I figured out one was ɔ and the other o, but now I don't even remember which word was supposed to have which. :roll:

Oh and, in the south all vowels are weird. :P [æ] instead of [ɛ] I associate with Limburg, but I may be wrong..
you either lose your fear
or spend your life
with one foot in the grave
over the rhine - spark

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-02-27, 22:57

Muisje wrote:
Dminor wrote:o [ɔ] (some claim the old difference between [ɔ] and [o] can still be heard phonetically, but I doubt it. In any case it's only one phoneme)
When I was writing a paper about Frisian (which has both [ɔ] and [o]) my dad (who is Frisian) tried to explain the difference with 'one is the vowel in top and the other in op'. But to me they sounded the same which surprised him very much. After having him repeat them a couple times I figured out one was ɔ and the other o, but now I don't even remember which word was supposed to have which. :roll:

Maybe it helps to hear a real minimal pair: try having him say "it bern hat in lyts kopke" and "ik wol graach in kopke kofje". :P I have the same difficulty in perceiving the difference (indeed [ɔ] and [o], respectively), which proves that for us they have fallen together. Frisian is just plain weird in keeping this opposition with such a small functional load.

Muisje wrote:Oh and, in the south all vowels are weird. :P [æ] instead of [ɛ] I associate with Limburg, but I may be wrong..

Could be, in the south it seems to be widespread.
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

Grytolle
Posts: 1122
Joined: 2007-07-24, 18:00
Gender: male

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Grytolle » 2011-03-06, 1:10

Dminor wrote:ie [i]
i [ɪ]
e [ɛ]
a [ɑ]
o [ɔ] (some claim the old difference between [ɔ] and [o] can still be heard phonetically, but I doubt it. In any case it's only one phoneme)
oe [u]

So <e> in closed syllable is still firmly at its place and does not, at least to my knowledge, have any tendency to become anything else in standard Dutch. In the south (? at least in Nijmegen and environment) you can hear [æ] for <e> though, but this is part of an entire vowel shift. :D


ó and ò are phonemes if speakers can differente meanings with the sounds, which is the case, eventhough it's lost on most

[u] and [i] show a much more variable length than the other short vowels (for the simple reason that they are historically long and haven't been completely shortened in all phonetical contexts (-r) and in all words (boel != boule)

On Dutch tv I hear a lot of weird realisations of the short e, somewhat like [e], especially before an r

User avatar
Dminor
Language Forum Moderator
Posts: 3730
Joined: 2005-08-14, 20:29
Real Name: Stefan Norbruis
Gender: male
Location: Leiden, Netherlands
Country: NL The Netherlands (Nederland)

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Dminor » 2011-03-06, 13:59

Yeah of course I was talking about (northern) Netherlandic Dutch. If there are people in Belgium who still have the two phonemes /ɔ/ and /o/ that wouldn't surprise me. Maybe some very old people (and people with Frisian as their mother tongue) still have it here as well, I don't know. But the thing I doubted was a claim I heard recently, that even among people who have merged these two (like me), there would still be a tendency to pronounce historical /o/ as [o] and historical /ɔ/ as [ɔ]. But who knows. I have noticed that I often pronounce at least a sound towards [o] (not sure if this depends on which word the sound is in). I can't say I do the same with short e though, like you seem to have noticed. I don't think I ever hear [e] for short e. :hmm:

You're right about ie and oe, at least before r they are long (and end in a short schwa). In other cases I personally don't do it (my boel has a short [u]), only in loanwords (beat [i:] vs. biet [i]). Pronouncing them long again strikes me as something Belgian. :P
काव्यशास्त्रविनोदेन कालो गच्छति धीमताम् । व्यसनेन च मूर्खाणां निद्रया कलहेन वा

Grytolle
Posts: 1122
Joined: 2007-07-24, 18:00
Gender: male

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby Grytolle » 2011-03-06, 15:28

Dminor wrote:Yeah of course I was talking about (northern) Netherlandic Dutch. If there are people in Belgium who still have the two phonemes /ɔ/ and /o/ that wouldn't surprise me.

Nope. It was something exclusive to Nothern Dutch, but now it only remains in the peripheries I guess :) Some dialects have a different opposition between /o/ or /ɔ/, /u/ and /u:/ though, which can be partly based on the same etymological principle the ɔ/o difference (one comes from germanic u, one from germanic o)

Maybe some very old people (and people with Frisian as their mother tongue) still have it here as well, I don't know. But the thing I doubted was a claim I heard recently, that even among people who have merged these two (like me), there would still be a tendency to pronounce historical /o/ as [o] and historical /ɔ/ as [ɔ]. But who knows.

I have noticed that I often pronounce at least a sound towards [o] (not sure if this depends on which word the sound is in).

Here's some reading:

http://dbnl.org/tekst/_tij003190801_01/ ... 1_0016.php
http://dbnl.org/tekst/_tij003192401_01/ ... 1_0002.php
ftp://ftp.cs.vu.nl/pub/dick/nlang/O_of_O/Artikel.pdf (written recently by this guy: http://www.few.vu.nl/~dick/ who by the looks of it isn't young anymore though)


I can't say I do the same with short e though, like you seem to have noticed. I don't think I ever hear [e] for short e. :hmm:

Maybe I'm just thinking of r-colouring before an English r?

You're right about ie and oe, at least before r they are long (and end in a short schwa). In other cases I personally don't do it (my boel has a short [u]), only in loanwords (beat [i:] vs. biet [i]). Pronouncing them long again strikes me as something Belgian. :P

http://www.dutchgrammar.com/forum/viewt ... 619#p16619

We discussed the matter here once, and a Dutch woman was friendly enough to record a bunch of words for us. Since then my stance on the matter is that there certainly is no phonemic difference in general in Standard Dutch between long and short oe, but the sound can definitely be not-short in certain words. It would be interesting to see if the same thing is true of "ie".



Edit:
When I listen to it now, I start doubting what I heard by some words back then..

XVoX
Posts: 13
Joined: 2007-09-09, 10:00

Re: <ij> and <ei> in songlyrics

Postby XVoX » 2011-03-10, 18:53

Thank you very much, Dminor, Muisje and Grytolle, and sorry for taking so long to reply: it was Carnaval here, so I only got (really) home this morning! :D
Anyway, interesting that Dminor and Muisje said that there seems to be no opposition anymore between [o] and [ɔ] and Grytolle says it seems to still be around: how do you guys realize these two phonemes now? Something like an [o̞] and [o̞ˑə] before /r/? How prevalent is this in the Netherlands? And Grytolle, how are these realized in Belgium?
Dminor, the short /u/ is really a "weird" sound, but I think I'm gonna go with the [ɞ]: besides being "pronounceable" by me, the other ones seem, as you said, either too "closed" or too "open", from what I've heard until now. And the [a̝] for /a:/ seems right on the spot too. :)
Last but not least, on the subject of consonants, is it true that Netherlandic /s/ and /z/ are usually realized respectively as [ɕ] and [ʑ], or a laminal version of [s] and [z]? How common is that? And Grytolle, does the same thing happen in Belgium or are they realized differently there?

Dank je wederom veel,
XVoX.


Return to “Dutch (Nederlands)”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest