Re: [tied] Other IE language with /w/

From: Miguel Carrasquer
Message: 41455
Date: 2005-10-16

On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 18:08:10 +0200, Grzegorz Jagodzinski
<grzegorj2000@...> wrote:

>Miguel Carrasquer wrote:
>> On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 11:00:59 +0200, Grzegorz Jagodzinski
>> <grzegorj2000@...> wrote:
>>
>>> The information on Sorbian pronunciation on
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorbian_alphabet is highly incomplete
>>> (however, [w] for the Lower Sorbian <w> is mentioned there). My page
>>> on Sorbian (http://www.aries.com.pl/grzegorzj/gram/unipl/luzyc.html)
>>> is available only in Polish as for now (however some information may
>>> be understood). I have based myself on a book in German and
>>> informations from a scholar specializing in Sorbian and a Sorbian
>>> speaker at the same time.
>>>
>>> The Upper Sorbian <w> is also [w], at least in some positions, not
>>> [v] like Wikipedia says, cf. "w und l sind wie englisches w zu
>>> sprechen, also wie u in sauer" from the Upper Sorbian online course
>>> (in German): http://sibz.whyi.org/~edi/wucbnica/1.lekcija.html.
>>
>>
>> But cf. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/7636
>
>"Sorbian [w] (which has resulted from the merger of *v [w] and "dark", i.e.
>non-palatalised *l) is a bilabial approximant without a conspicuous velar
>component"

So, as Piotr says, it's not [w], which by definition is a
labiovelar approximant.

[...]
>>> You are fully right, and that is why I wrote "I mean the standard
>>> version". I was also interested in this problem, and just asked some
>>> native Dutch speakers what they think. Basing on what they said I
>>> can present the thing this way now: the pronunciation of (initial)
>>> <w> as the labio-dental approximant is recommended by some courses
>>> and dictionaries (including these I have) but is spread only in some
>>> dialects, especially those from the southern part of the Dutch
>>> language area.
>>
>> No.
>
>There is nothing to negate, indeed, unless you want to shake the opinion of
>the native speakers. Of course, their knowledge may be limited.

There is everything to negate. The southern part of the
Dutch language area, as I explained, is precisely where the
labio-dental pronunciation is entirely absent.

I *am* a native speaker, and my knowledge is not limited.

>> In the standard languages, <w> is a labiodental
>> approximant in the north,
>> [...]
>> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
>> mcv@...
>
>So, we agree in the main points - <w> is a labiodental approximant in the
>standard pronunciation, and its pronunciation varies from the south to the
>north, becoming closer and closer to [v].

No. It's just as non-[v] in Rotterdam as it is in Groningen.

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