New CBB

Ik wil Nederlands goed spreken. :D

Since both "g" and "r" are voiced velar and uvular fricatives, it's difficult (or just almost inaudible) to make the difference once they're clustered. Is it okay if I only do the velar or the uvular one? Does it it make such a big difference?

Just to be sure, please provide how you produce "groen" in IPA.

I'd do [ʁuːn].

Ik spreek het als [X] uit, dus ik zeg [Xu:n], maar klaar is wel ook het Nederlands mijn moedertaal niet.

_________________
КЕРВЕНСКИЙ

I got an app on my Ipod where people speak words out loud (this helps me get some vocabulary), and they indeed produce [X]. @_@ Dunno what to think.

Ik spreek het persoonlijk uit als [Xun], ik denk dat dit ook de correcte uitspraak is in het ABN.

_________________

Maxédri
Faljüdax

So both of you are telling me they aren't voiced, but were unvoiced? :3

It's more of a provincial matter, I think. Now that I come to think of it, I've heard people who do manage stick the "r" in between, making it more [Xʀun] -like, if I have my IPA right.

_________________

Maxédri
Faljüdax

Depends on the kind of Dutch you're speaking; the most standard pronunciation for r is [r]. Dialectal pronunciations include [ɾ] and [ʀ] in addition to [ʁ]. Of these four, only [ʁ] seems to me like it would be really difficult to combine with a preceding [χ].

_________________

I can do it just fine.

Anyway, on the subject, I have to ask, since Visinoid and I were trying to find out yesterday. It seemed [r] is never used in onsets or something... We listened to a lot of clips of words with initial /r/ and a lot of them were uvular and some of them were some weird, kind of trilled, but odd, sound. I didn't hear a single [r] in any of the clips I listened too. Do people actually use [r] in onsets or did we just have bad lucks with the clips (which did come from a variety of speakers)?

_________________
= | = | = | = | = | =
‹› · Ḿḿ Ńń Ĺĺ Śś Źź Ąą Ǫǫ Ųų Æ̨æ̨ Ǽǽ Œ̨œ̨ Œ́œ́ Ɣɣ Y̋y̋ Įį Şş Z̧z̧ θ
Āā Ēē Īī Ōō Ūū ↗ Ṭṭ C̣c̣ Łł Ḍḍ Ṣṣ Ẓẓ Ṇṇ Ŋŋ e˞ o˞ ʷ ʲ ʰ ə

No big deal if your G/CHs and Rs are not uvular enough.

My accent when I speak Dutch is undoubtedly more Flemish and when I say "groen", it sounds like [xʀun].
I think [χ] (the uvular one) mostly appears in Dutch from the Netherlands, while Flemish people say [x] (velar) and roll their Rs. That's what makes Flemish a little bit smoother. In West Flanders people almost say their G/CHs as if they were Hs! (But avoid doing this as much as you can, 'cos those people are being made fun of).

If you can't pronounce "groen", you can also roll you R's and go: [χrun]. I've heard people say it like that (even in the Netherlands I think).

_________________



Ba Gai Dun, Popiaro, Rumi, ...

If I didn't care that much, I'd do all of them as [X]. >< It's funny that they are all merging.

You didn't clear up my confusion about [r] elsewhere, though. I'm 100 % sure most Dutch I've heard is full of [r] at least in other places, like the /r/ in ‹voor›. Is this wrong? By this I don't mean "will people understand me?", but "do the natives themselves do it, and how common is it, and why is it this is why I've heard the most if it isn't the most common (if that is the case)?".

_________________
= | = | = | = | = | =
‹› · Ḿḿ Ńń Ĺĺ Śś Źź Ąą Ǫǫ Ųų Æ̨æ̨ Ǽǽ Œ̨œ̨ Œ́œ́ Ɣɣ Y̋y̋ Įį Şş Z̧z̧ θ
Āā Ēē Īī Ōō Ūū ↗ Ṭṭ C̣c̣ Łł Ḍḍ Ṣṣ Ẓẓ Ṇṇ Ŋŋ e˞ o˞ ʷ ʲ ʰ ə

Ik wil het weten! :@

_________________
= | = | = | = | = | =
‹› · Ḿḿ Ńń Ĺĺ Śś Źź Ąą Ǫǫ Ųų Æ̨æ̨ Ǽǽ Œ̨œ̨ Œ́œ́ Ɣɣ Y̋y̋ Įį Şş Z̧z̧ θ
Āā Ēē Īī Ōō Ūū ↗ Ṭṭ C̣c̣ Łł Ḍḍ Ṣṣ Ẓẓ Ṇṇ Ŋŋ e˞ o˞ ʷ ʲ ʰ ə

Ik ook. :C

Sorry for the late reply. I haven't been here for ages.
I'm afraid I can't answer accurately because I'm not a native speaker.
If you say [r] everywhere, that will do it. If you say [R], make it clear that it is not a [x] (so don't say g/ch like you say r).

In general, there are plenty of accents/dialects. Sometimes two Dutch speakers can't understand each other while speaking their mother tongue, so they switch to English (true story). When Dutch people show Flemish people speaking on TV, they subtitle them (the same goes for Dutch people speaking on Flemish TV). But the written language is pretty much the same.
What I can advise is try to listen to people from the area you like and stick to their pronunciation. Avoid mixing all pronunciations...
Or, you can just listen to the national broadcasting and try to imitate their pronunciation.

It's been a century that Flemish and Dutch are building separate Ausbau, accentuating their differences. Flemish are creating a common language based on the rules of the most central dialect (brabants) and a Flemish pronunciation. So for example they say things like "nen" instead of "een" in the masculine, because it works more like German. (...But that has nothing to do with this thread.)

_________________



Ba Gai Dun, Popiaro, Rumi, ...

They should have their own separate languages then. ><

Are the subtitles put for political reasons or for actual lack of understanding? Despite having studied just a little Dutch and no Flemish at all, the little Flemish I've heard has to me, as a non-native speaker, been as comprehensible as any Dutch I've ever heard, and a few times even more so, and I don't even have the vocabulary, grammar or sense of a native Dutch speaker (that's why I'm replying in English right now). How could the native Dutch speakers possibly have problems understanding anything? In my experience there are only tiny differences in pronunciation and virtually none in vocabulary.

_________________
= | = | = | = | = | =
‹› · Ḿḿ Ńń Ĺĺ Śś Źź Ąą Ǫǫ Ųų Æ̨æ̨ Ǽǽ Œ̨œ̨ Œ́œ́ Ɣɣ Y̋y̋ Įį Şş Z̧z̧ θ
Āā Ēē Īī Ōō Ūū ↗ Ṭṭ C̣c̣ Łł Ḍḍ Ṣṣ Ẓẓ Ṇṇ Ŋŋ e˞ o˞ ʷ ʲ ʰ ə

I think they put subtitles because there is lack of understanding. Standard Dutch with both pronunciation is not so disturbing and the differences in terms of lexicon are not huge.
However spoken Dutch or Flemish is often a mix between a local dialect and the standard language, plus some people have a peculiar pronunciation.
But maybe when people talk to foreigners, they try to make their language clear, by avoiding the use of their dialect.

We should wait for a native speaker to answer that question.

_________________



Ba Gai Dun, Popiaro, Rumi, ...

They're not showing. :<

I should add that my experience comes from Disney/Dreamworks dubs and not from people trying to speak to me. Those should have no bias towards being intentionally more easily comprehensible for Dutch speakers, since the movies are dubbed into Dutch too, but the correspondences in lyrics have been amazing when compared to, say, those between Danish/Norwegian/Swedish which could potentially have had the same lyrics if the three translators worked together. I assume there is no such coöperation between the Dutch and Flemish translators either, and yet they end up so similar.

_________________
= | = | = | = | = | =
‹› · Ḿḿ Ńń Ĺĺ Śś Źź Ąą Ǫǫ Ųų Æ̨æ̨ Ǽǽ Œ̨œ̨ Œ́œ́ Ɣɣ Y̋y̋ Įį Şş Z̧z̧ θ
Āā Ēē Īī Ōō Ūū ↗ Ṭṭ C̣c̣ Łł Ḍḍ Ṣṣ Ẓẓ Ṇṇ Ŋŋ e˞ o˞ ʷ ʲ ʰ ə

Probably because dubbed cartoons are often made in the Netherlands and used by Flemish TVs, so they have to be clear to both.


Like I said before, written Dutch is really the same in both countries. Differences appear when you use more specific words (but they're not that many) or when you try to sound local/familiar.

_________________



Ba Gai Dun, Popiaro, Rumi, ...

Als Haarlemmer zou ik [xɾun] of [xrun] zeggen, denk ik. Normaal wordt de <r> als /ɾ/ uitgesproken, maar in <gr> hoor ik misschien wel een /r/.


Een /r/ in <voor> zou heel vreemd zijn. Ik zou voor uitspreken als [vo:ɹ].

Nu ik er over nadenk, volgens mij wordt de <r> (in Haarlem) bijna nooit als /r/ uitgesproken, behalve in <gr> of om iets een absurde nadruk te geven; iemand zou naar zijn hond "hierrrrrr" /hi:r:/ kunnen roepen.

Overigens, "dat <gr>" is nogal een vreemde constructie. Ik zou voor "de <gr>" gaan (en niet "het <gr>".

_________________
native | fluent | basic | translate | very basic