Re: [tied] Re: Pronunciation of "r" - again?

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 17:38:05 -0400 (EDT), Andrew Jarrette
<anjarrette@...> wrote:

>By the way, Dutch is supposed to have (approximately) the same labiodental
>approximant, but every time I hear Dutch speakers use it, it sounds like
>English /v/ to me, while what officially is /v/ in Dutch (written "v")
>usually seems to sound like English /f/ to me (in initial position at least),
>although I have heard a couple speakers whose Dutch "w" and "v" sounded
>exactly the same to me, even after I pressed them to repeat contrasting
>examples several times for me to be able to hear the difference. Does
>Dutch really have the labiodental approximant, or has it evolved to /v/?

It's really a labiodental approximant [V] (in emphatic
pronunciation ["Wat??!!"] sometimes even a labiodental
stop).

Postvocalically, <w> is pronounced [w] (uw, lauw, etc.).

The Flemish pronunciation of <w> (pre- or post-vocalically)
is a rounded bilabial approximant (essentially a
non-velarized [w], which may be represented as [Y] (as in
French <huis>) or as [BW] (as Spanish non-initial,
non-postnasal /b/, but rounded).

Only in the combination <wr-> the sound normally changes to
/v/ (and therefore [f] in a number of varieties).


=======================
Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
mcv@...