Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [folkspraak] Re: Plurals...

Expand Messages
  • Jan-Willem Benjamins
    This is generally true. I just wished to add that my wife (who is russian) had no problems with this sound. By the way: it is my impression that foreigners
    Message 1 of 87 , Jul 31, 2005
      This is generally true. I just wished to add that my wife (who is
      russian) had no problems with this sound.
      By the way: it is my impression that foreigners have less problems
      learning flemish than standard-dutch.

      Jan-Willem

      --- roerdinkholder_ingmar <ingmar.roerdinkholder@...> wrote:

      > Yes, Dutch ui is one of the most difficult sounds for foreigners to
      > learn. I work with foreign people from all over the world daily who
      > come to live in the Netherlands and who are learning Dutch at
      > school, and <ui> becoms usually something like [2:], [au], [ai],
      > [oi] in their mouths. So [2y] for PG au has no use...
      >
      > Ingmar
      >
      > --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, "David Parke" <parked@x> wrote:
      > > I once tried to objectively establish what the mean sound of this
      > long
      > > u was among the source language. I plotted the sounds in the 4
      > langs
      > > on a 2D matrix with Front-back on one axis, close-open on the
      > other.
      > > You will see a similar matrix on an IPA chart. I then worked out
      > the x
      > > and y co-ordinates for the average. I divided each sound into a 2
      > > parts, treating the long u sounds as a dipthong. That is Scandy
      > [}:]
      > > was treated as [}}].
      > > So I was able to establish the average vowel sound for both the
      > first
      > > and second part of the sound.
      > > The biggest hole in my methodology that I now see, is I did not
      > > consider the rounded-unrounded dimension, which would add a z axis
      > to
      > > the matrix. I might some time re-caculate the data with that in
      > mind.
      > > Bizarrely, or perhaps serendipitously, the average sound was very
      > > close to [2Y]] which is the sound of standard Dutch "ui".
      > > For this reason, I would consider [2Y] a good candidate for this
      > > phoneme. It's also quite close to the German "äu" or "eu" phoneme.
      > > The biggest disadvantage I can see for this sound, it that it is
      > quite
      > > hard for us foreigners to pronounce.
      > > Could some of the Dutch speakers tell us what they think of this?
      > Is
      > > the "ui" sound particularly difficult for foreign speakers of
      > Dutch to
      > > master?




      ___________________________________________________________
      To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
    • stefichjo
      Yeah, well, then I will use -e . I have already eliminated a case system in my FS, by the way. Bye, Stephan ... whereas persons is ... point is ... in ...
      Message 87 of 87 , Aug 5, 2005
        Yeah, well, then I will use "-e".

        I have already eliminated a case system in my FS, by the way.

        Bye,
        Stephan

        --- In folkspraak@yahoogroups.com, Jan-Willem Benjamins
        <benjaminsjw@y...> wrote:
        >
        > --- stefichjo <sts@s...> wrote:
        >
        > > "people" is the (collective) plural of "person",
        whereas "persons" is
        > > the countable plural of "person". The idea of countable<-
        >collective
        > > exists in english. This was one point I wanted to show (this
        point is
        > > about _concept_).
        >
        > Okay, so the _concept_ exists in english, but it is _not_ reflected
        in
        > the grammar. If you want a collective word for "person", you take
        the
        > word "people". That doesn't mean, in my opinion, that "people" is a
        > plural of "person", in much the same way as "countryside" is not a
        > collective plural of "farm".
        >
        > > The other point is that in German there are different plural
        forms
        > > (this point is about _form_) (Männer <-> Mannen, Wörter <->
        Worte).
        > > In FS I wanted to relate form and concept. This is my attempt to
        save
        > > both form and concept, otherwise you would just add "-s" to
        > > everything that is plural, and I find that some salt would be
        missing
        > > in our "soup".
        >
        > The grammar of any auxlang will be simplified. I personally like the
        > case-system of german, as it adds so much flexibility to the
        language,
        > but I think it would be silly to introduce it into FS, as no other
        > sourcelang (with the exception of Icelandic) has anything similar.
        > Same goes for the countable<->collective distinction (form-wise).
        You
        > can hardly call it common in the sourcelangs.
        >
        > > As I stated before, there is no need that I insist on this plural
        > > system. My nouns (until now) don't end in "e", so "e" might be a
        > > perfect plural ending for me. (German: Ding -> Dinge (FS: thing -
        >
        > > thinge)).
        >
        > That sounds absolutely fine.
        >
        > Jan-Willem
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ___________________________________________________________
        > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all
        new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.