Newsgroups: sci.lang,soc.culture.nordic
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!newsfeed.pitt.edu!godot.cc.duq.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!sun4nl!freya.let.rug.nl!p1822an.let.rug.nl!s0765708
From: s0765708@let.rug.nl (S.J. Dommisse)
Subject: Re: easiest lang for beginner (Dutch, Swedish, Finnish)
Sender: news@let.rug.nl (News system at let.rug.nl)
Message-ID: <s0765708.683.31A218FB@let.rug.nl>
Date: Wed, 22 May 1996 02:26:51 GMT
Lines: 68
References: <Pine.HPP.3.91.960507030300.11260D-100000@course1.HARVARD.EDU> <holman-2708561656540001@eng18.pc.helsinki.fi> <4nln3k$8ie@epimetheus.algonet.se>
Nntp-Posting-Host: p1822an.let.rug.nl
Organization: Faculteit der Letteren, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, NL

In article <4nln3k$8ie@epimetheus.algonet.se> sommar@algonet.se (Erland Sommarskog) writes:
>From: sommar@algonet.se (Erland Sommarskog)
>Subject: Re: easiest lang for beginner (Dutch, Swedish, Finnish)
>Date: Sat, 18 May 96 23:40:00 GMT

>Ha scritto holman@katk.helsinki.fi (Eugene Holman):
>>SWEDISH
>>* Pronunciation: Rather difficult, since Swedish (at least the 'standard'
>>variety of it spoken in Sweden) has several unusual vowels and consonants,
>>e.g. retroflexed dentals and the 'sj'-sound in sjuk 'sick' which are not
>>found in other European languages. 

>Hm, you don't need to bother about the "sj" in "sjuk". While as Eugene
>notes, this is a strange creature, it is also subject to huge variation,
>and if you get in conversation with some Swedes you might find that every-
>one is pronouncing the sound differently - even that the same person is 
>chosing different realiasations on different occassions. Phomenically you 
>would write them all /S/, you can use the sound for "sh" in "shoe" without 
>being particularly wrong. You will then have to learn to distinguish this 
>alevoar fricative from the palatal fricative in "tjuv" - then again, there 
>are Swedes who don't.

>From my experience the retroflexes does not cause much problems either.
>Odd as they are, foreigners seem to pick them up quite easily. And,
>again, it is possible to avoid them. They arise when "r" is followed
>by "s", "n", "d", "t" and "l", but several dialects pronounce them
>separately. And while in Sweden this is dialects have an uvular or
>velar "r", I know people who speak with a front "r" and yet do not
>use retroflexes without having any Finland-Swedish ancestry at all.
>How this has come about I don't know, but I'm suspecting these
>individuals to have abadoned their original dialect for an over-
>correct standard Swedish.

>There are nevertheless some difficult sound in Swedish. "u" as in "kul"
>is a rounded semi-high front vowel which has few equals. To a foreigner
>it might seem close to "y" which is a rounded high front vowel, but I
>can assure you to a Swede they are most definitely not.

>Then again, I once spoke with a British gentleman who said "Sturegatan".
>His "u" was perfect, but the first "a" in "gatan" revealed him directly.
>To wit, the "a" is the same as in "father" but with slightly different
>colour.

>Anyway, Swedish pronouciation is probably difficult because it is so
>irregular. Not so bad as English, but bad enough. One thing we are
>particularly fond of are homographs, that is words with the same 
>spelling but different pronounciation: "vn", "kort", "hov", "vits",
>"hnger".

>>The serious student of Swedish also has to learn to deal with
>>regional varieties such as Scanian and Finland-Swedish, both of which
>>differ sharply in pronunciation from the Stockholm-area oriented standard
>>'broadcast' Swedish. 

>To be fair, dialects of Swedish are not worse than say of Italian.
>Or for that matter, English.


>--
>Erland Sommarskog, Stockholm, sommar@algonet.se
>F=F6r =F6vrigt anser jag att QP b=F6r f=F6rst=F6ras.
>B=65sid=65s, I think QP should b=65 d=65stroy=65d.


By the way: I have spent twenty years learing native dutch, and four years 
learning nearly-native swedish.. i vote for the swedish to be easier.

Jeroen
