Re: American Dutch dialects

From: Piotr Gasiorowski
Message: 63527
Date: 2009-03-01

On 2009-03-01 01:57, Andrew Jarrette wrote:

> Yes, you're absolutely right. To tell the truth, I should have
> withdrawn from arguing with you long ago because I do not have enough
> knowledge of European and American history to make any claims which
> might be any more than just beliefs. Yes, your proposal stands and
> mine is just a belief. And you have every right to question my and
> any other belief about the origin of American English. I apologize
> for calling your proposal a belief. However, your proposal has not
> yet changed my belief, if your ultimate aim is to convince me or any
> other members of the list of its validity. I still think it's easier
> to believe that American retroflex /r/ was inherited from Irish,
> Scotch, and some English settlers, rather than due to Dutch influence
> or a Dutch substrate. Hope that's not opting out. I would have to
> read a lot of books and articles to argue my belief the science way,
> and I can't do that during the course of this discussion/argument with
> you.

See

http://ifa.amu.edu.pl/sap/files/42/05Gasiorowski.pdf

where it is argued that different realisation of /r/ (including
retroflex ~ bunched and uvular ~ velar ones) date back to Old English.

Piotr