Re: [tied] Dutch "w" (was: Re: Slavic peoples and places)

From: Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
Message: 7663
Date: 2001-06-16

On Sat, 16 Jun 2001 10:14:07 -0000, tgpedersen@... wrote:

>The strange thing is that those who still hold on to the
>pronounciation /w/ in Jutland are fishermen (judging from TV
>interviwews) as apparently in Dutch too. To a certain extent,
>fishermen and sailors form(ed) a separate community in Denmark
>(Holland too? Katwijk is a fishing town). They are likely to have
>been the contact with the colonial tongue in colonial times. I have a
>suspicion that /w/ -> /v/ is due to French influence, and therefore
>18th century. So are you 100% Dutch /w/ can't have been the origin of
>Surnams Dutch /w/?

It's possible that 17th c. Dutch still had [w], but one of the
distinguishing feautures of Dutch colonialism is that it failed to
have any linguistic effect at all on the population of the colonies.
In Indonesia, the language of administration was Malay (now Bahasa
Indonesia). In Saba, St. Eustace and St. Martin, the local language
is English (the islands were briefly in English hands during the 18th
c.), and in Aruba, Curacao and Bonaire the vernacular is Papiamento, a
Portuguese Creole relexified with Spanish, even though the islands
have been in Dutch hands since 1643. In Surinam, as I mentioned, the
local language is mainly Creole English (Sranan Tongo) [there are
other English-based Creoles in the interior, spoken by the descendants
of runaway slaves, besides American Indian languages and Sarnami, the
local Hindustani dialect, spoken by the sizeable (Asian) Indian
minority]. This despite the fact that the slaves were introduced by
the Dutch in 1682, and that Surinam has been Dutch up to independence,
with only two brief periods of English rule (1799-1802, 1804-1815). It
was enough, though.

The main influence on the Dutch spoken (mainly as 2nd language) by the
Surinamese has to be 20th century, and not introduced by sailors, let
alone fishermen, but schoolteachers.

Miguel Carrasquer Vidal