- Hi David. I just listened to your ui-file ;-)
I can give you a few tips about how to pronounce Dutch ui.
The way you pronounced it in the file is good to understand,
but to me -and other Dutchies I guess too - it sounds like
"heus - ik ging naar het heus"
So probably [2y] isn't the right way to describe <ui>, because Dutch
<eu> is too close to that, and <neus> [n2:is] doesn't rhyme to
The first element in the diphthong <ui> is closer to German short
<ö>, or even to short <a>.
I sometimes give the advise to foreign people who really have
trouble with <ui>, just to say short <a> [a] first, and then <u> [y],
then you'll get [hays], which is pretty close to <ui>.
But [höys] is the real thing.
--- In email@example.com, "David Parke" <parked@x> wrote:
> I actually meant [2Y] for PG long u. But I guess for either it is a
> difficult sound. When I hear people who know "a little bit of
> say the "ui" sound, the say it as [OI] (like English boy). I think
> this is what they teach (or accept) in Night School Dutch classes.
> In my Eyewitness Travel Guide Dutch Phrase Book (I. Laponder & JT
> Beckenridge, Dorling Kindersley, London 1997), they use say "use
> in cow" for the "ui" phoneme. In my experience phrase books don't
> attempt to teach correct pronunciation. They map sounds from the
> native language to the foreign one in such a way as to maintain the
> relationship of phonemes, but not to pronounce exactly correctly.
> Hmm I will post a sound file in the files section with my attempts
> "ui" and you Dutchies (or Belgies) can tell me if I am even close.
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jan-Willem Benjamins
> <benjaminsjw@y...> wrote:
> > 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
> > learning flemish than standard-dutch.
> > Jan-Willem
> > --- roerdinkholder_ingmar <ingmar.roerdinkholder@w...> wrote:
> > > Yes, Dutch ui is one of the most difficult sounds for
> > > learn. I work with foreign people from all over the world
> > > come to live in the Netherlands and who are learning Dutch at
> > > school, and <ui> becoms usually something like [2:], [au],
> > > [oi] in their mouths. So [2y] for PG au has no use...
> > >
> > > Ingmar
> > >
> > > --- In email@example.com, "David Parke" <parked@x>
> > > > I once tried to objectively establish what the mean sound of
> > > long
> > > > u was among the source language. I plotted the sounds in the
> > > langs
> > > > on a 2D matrix with Front-back on one axis, close-open on
> > > other.
> > > > You will see a similar matrix on an IPA chart. I then worked
> > > 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
> > > [}:]
> > > > was treated as [}}].
> > > > So I was able to establish the average vowel sound for both
> > > first
> > > > and second part of the sound.
> > > > The biggest hole in my methodology that I now see, is I did
> > > > consider the rounded-unrounded dimension, which would add a
> > > to
> > > > the matrix. I might some time re-caculate the data with that
> > > mind.
> > > > Bizarrely, or perhaps serendipitously, the average sound was
> > > > close to [2Y]] which is the sound of standard Dutch "ui".
> > > > For this reason, I would consider [2Y] a good candidate for
> > > > phoneme. It's also quite close to the German "äu" or "eu"
> > > > The biggest disadvantage I can see for this sound, it that
> > > quite
> > > > hard for us foreigners to pronounce.
> > > > Could some of the Dutch speakers tell us what they think of
> > > Is
> > > > the "ui" sound particularly difficult for foreign speakers
> > > Dutch to
> > > > master?
> > ___________________________________________________________
> > To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all
> Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
- Yeah, well, then I will use "-e".
I have already eliminated a case system in my FS, by the way.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Jan-Willem Benjamins
>whereas "persons" is
> --- stefichjo <sts@s...> wrote:
> > "people" is the (collective) plural of "person",
> > the countable plural of "person". The idea of countable<-point is
> > exists in english. This was one point I wanted to show (this
> > about _concept_).in
> Okay, so the _concept_ exists in english, but it is _not_ reflected
> the grammar. If you want a collective word for "person", you takethe
> word "people". That doesn't mean, in my opinion, that "people" is aforms
> 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
> > (this point is about _form_) (Männer <-> Mannen, Wörter <->Worte).
> > In FS I wanted to relate form and concept. This is my attempt tosave
> > both form and concept, otherwise you would just add "-s" tomissing
> > everything that is plural, and I find that some salt would be
> > in our "soup".language,
> The grammar of any auxlang will be simplified. I personally like the
> case-system of german, as it adds so much flexibility to the
> but I think it would be silly to introduce it into FS, as no otherYou
> sourcelang (with the exception of Icelandic) has anything similar.
> Same goes for the countable<->collective distinction (form-wise).
> can hardly call it common in the sourcelangs.new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
> > 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.
> To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all