Newsgroups: alt.usage.german,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!oitnews.harvard.edu!canopus.hbs.edu!news-in.tiac.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!uchinews!not-for-mail
From: deb5@midway.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff)
Subject: Re: Pronunciation of "soft" <ch> in Berlin
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: ellis-nfs.uchicago.edu
Message-ID: <DzCMKz.82D@midway.uchicago.edu>
Sender: news@midway.uchicago.edu (News Administrator)
Organization: The University of Chicago
References: <3259DF18.5C6A@netvision.net.il> <325EA09A.52E1@rz.uni-leipzig.de> <53lsr7$hnb@halley.pi.net> <53n6ic$l28@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 03:19:47 GMT
Lines: 58

In article <53n6ic$l28@mtinsc01-mgt.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
Jon Robert Crofoot  <Bob.Crofoot@postoffice.worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>mcv@pi.net (Miguel Carrasquer Vidal) wrote:
>>Horst Rothe <rotheh@rz.uni-leipzig.de> wrote:
>>>In strong saechsisch accent any ch (spoken like ch in "ich") can be 
>>>substituted by sch.
>>
>>Yes, but does this /S/ differ from "sch" in "scheinen" or "er wischt"
>>or "statt"?
>>
>   It probably does, but the post-alveolar /ch/ in "ich" is 
>so close to the alveolar /sch/ in "scheinen", etc., that a 
>listener who isn't accustomed to phonological analysis 
>can't distinguish between the two sounds. 

	I must say, I'm a little thrown by this terminology.  Most
analyses describe the "Ich-Laut" ([C], i.e. IPA C-cedilla) as a pure
palatal fricative and the German "sch" ([S], IPA extended-S) as an
aveolo-palatal.  (The _Atlas zur deutschen Sprache_, though, calls it and
aveolar sound "mit gehobenem Zungenruecken", i.e. dorso-aveolar, which I
always thought was, strictly speaking, the sound represented by Basque
<s>.)  I don't remember encountering the term "post-aveolar" before; what
other sounds does it describe?

	In any case, I don't think that German [C] and [S] sound quite 
that close; the latter is usually pronounced with rounded and protruded
lips, which lowers the pitch considerably.  English [S], with the lips
spread, is more similar to [C] and generally replaces it in German words
borrowed into English.  However, in my experience tutoring German,
most Americans can easily distinguish [C] and [S], even though they
often can't consistently produce the former.  (They have no problem 
pronouncing it initially, in words like "huge" and "Hugh", but it's
difficult for them to produce it in word-final position.)

>   About 25 years ago, I was puzzled by a taxi-driver in 
>Cologne who pronounced an address on Stalagsweg as 
>something like "shtalagsvaysh".  That is, the palatal 
>unvoiced fricative (represented by the terminal G in the 
>spelling of the word) was replaced by the post-alveolar 
>equivalent.  More or less...  Or is that "affricative"?  
>Phonologists, help me here!

	I think you mean "fricative".  A post-aveolar affricate
(understanding that to be synonmous with "aveolo-palatal affricate") would
be [tS], the sound represented by English <ch> or German <tsch>.  I
haven't spent much time in Berlin or Sachsen, so I tend to associate the
conflation of [C] and [S] with the Rhineland.  I remember a particularly
amusing example of this conflation (coupled with serious overcorrection)
posted to this group some time ago by someone who claimed to have heard
it from the lips of a Rhenish colleague:  
					"elektroschemiche Zwichenchischt".



-- 
	 Daniel "Da" von Brighoff    /\          Dilettanten
	(deb5@midway.uchicago.edu)  /__\         erhebt Euch
				   /____\      gegen die Kunst!
