I know that German tends to devoice at the end of words, but is it always the case in Hochdeutsch? What about the other dialects? I don't think Low German devoices, does it? What about the Middle German dialects?
Word-final devoicing in German
If you're asking what word-final devoicing is, it's changing sounds like "z" to "s", "g" to "k", "d" to "t", etc. when they occur at the end of a word. For instance, Germans often pronounce the English word "bed" as "bet".
I don't think Swiss German does it. Yiddish doesn't either. I wonder if other Germans can hear it when people don't do the devoicing. The fact that they pronounce the English word "bed" as "bet" indicates that they probably wouldn't really notice.
<< So is this only a feature of Hochdeutsch? >>
-- Je ne pense pas. Le dévoisement des consonnes finales est en allemand un caractère structurant, constaté dans tous les dialectes (en y incluant néerlandais, afrikaans, frison...).
Mais c'est exact que le degré d'assourdissement semble varier un peu. 'Guten Tag' est généralement prononcé 'Guten Tach' dans la moitié Nord, dans le Sud c'est plutôt 'Gut'n Toak' (2 dévoisements diffférents), et on entend ça et là parfois un 'Tag' relativement voisé, mais c'est difficile de déceler une répartition régionale systématique. (Comme pour 'Hamburg / Hamburch / Hamburk')
La plupart des Allemands tendent à prononcer 'ich mag' plutôt voisé, probablement pour éviter l'ambigüité 'das mag ich nicht / das mach' ich nicht'.
Je vais être en Allemagne dans quelques jours, j'essaierai d'être attentif aux éventuelles disparités locales.
-- Je ne pense pas. Le dévoisement des consonnes finales est en allemand un caractère structurant, constaté dans tous les dialectes (en y incluant néerlandais, afrikaans, frison...).
Mais c'est exact que le degré d'assourdissement semble varier un peu. 'Guten Tag' est généralement prononcé 'Guten Tach' dans la moitié Nord, dans le Sud c'est plutôt 'Gut'n Toak' (2 dévoisements diffférents), et on entend ça et là parfois un 'Tag' relativement voisé, mais c'est difficile de déceler une répartition régionale systématique. (Comme pour 'Hamburg / Hamburch / Hamburk')
La plupart des Allemands tendent à prononcer 'ich mag' plutôt voisé, probablement pour éviter l'ambigüité 'das mag ich nicht / das mach' ich nicht'.
Je vais être en Allemagne dans quelques jours, j'essaierai d'être attentif aux éventuelles disparités locales.
Translation of French:
I think not. The devoicing of final consonants in German is a structuring found in all dialects (including Dutch, afrikaans, Frisian ...).
But it is true that the degree of silencing seems to vary a bit. 'Guten Tag' is usually pronounced 'Guten Tach' in the northern half, but in the South rather 'Gut'n Toak' (2 different devoicings), and one sometimes hears a relatively voiced 'Tag', but it is difficult to detect a systematic regional distribution. (As for 'Hamburg / Hamburch / Hamburk')
Most Germans tend to pronounce 'ich mag' rather voiced, presumably to avoid ambiguity 'ich nicht das mag / das mach' ich nicht.
I will be in Germany in a few days, I will try to be attentive to any local differences.
I think not. The devoicing of final consonants in German is a structuring found in all dialects (including Dutch, afrikaans, Frisian ...).
But it is true that the degree of silencing seems to vary a bit. 'Guten Tag' is usually pronounced 'Guten Tach' in the northern half, but in the South rather 'Gut'n Toak' (2 different devoicings), and one sometimes hears a relatively voiced 'Tag', but it is difficult to detect a systematic regional distribution. (As for 'Hamburg / Hamburch / Hamburk')
Most Germans tend to pronounce 'ich mag' rather voiced, presumably to avoid ambiguity 'ich nicht das mag / das mach' ich nicht.
I will be in Germany in a few days, I will try to be attentive to any local differences.
>> think not. The devoicing of final consonants in German is a structuring found in all dialects (including Dutch, afrikaans, Frisian ...). <<
No, it is not found in *all* dialects: For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German_language
Neither Swiss German nor the Swiss national variety of standard German exhibits final devoicing, unlike the German national variety of standard German (for example, "Zug" is pronounced [tsuːg] and not [tsuːk]).
I don't believe that Middle High German had it either. There are several other dialects that lack it. But most of the have it.
No, it is not found in *all* dialects: For example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_German_language
Neither Swiss German nor the Swiss national variety of standard German exhibits final devoicing, unlike the German national variety of standard German (for example, "Zug" is pronounced [tsuːg] and not [tsuːk]).
I don't believe that Middle High German had it either. There are several other dialects that lack it. But most of the have it.
Most northern and central dialects of Middle High German had final devoicing, but obviously Alemannic dialects of it did not. As for Alemannic dialects, aka Swiss German, the matter with them is a bit more complex. Technically speaking, there *are* no voiced obstruents in Alemannic to begin with. However, though, the old fortis/lenis distinction has been preserved in Alemannic as a pure quantity distinction without actual voicing per se. Likewise, Standard Swiss German has acquired such a preserved distinction through the influence of Alemannic.
Yiddish, on the other hand, is more complex in this regard; apparently it reacquired a fortis/lenis distinction independent of that that had been present in early Old High German.
Yiddish, on the other hand, is more complex in this regard; apparently it reacquired a fortis/lenis distinction independent of that that had been present in early Old High German.
By "Standard Swiss German" I meant to say "Swiss Standard German" above, as such is a Swiss variation upon Standard German, not a standardized version of Alemannic.
<< Most northern and central dialects of Middle High German had final devoicing, but obviously Alemannic dialects of it did not. >>
-- Yep. You and Wiki seem to be right.
I'm not very knowledgeable about schweitzerdeutsch, but in a second thought I remember that in Alsace and Baden-Wurttemberg (Alemannic area) there are a lot of family names ending with '-oog' (Woog, Moog) as well as toponyms (Roeschwoog, Alsace) whereby the final '-g' is definitely voiced.
-- Yep. You and Wiki seem to be right.
I'm not very knowledgeable about schweitzerdeutsch, but in a second thought I remember that in Alsace and Baden-Wurttemberg (Alemannic area) there are a lot of family names ending with '-oog' (Woog, Moog) as well as toponyms (Roeschwoog, Alsace) whereby the final '-g' is definitely voiced.
>>Most northern and central dialects of Middle High German had final devoicing, but obviously Alemannic dialects of it did not.<<
Well, strictly speaking, I should have said that Alemannic dialects of MHG did not have final devoicing in that they did not have neutralization of fortis-lenis pairs in final positions, not that they did not truly devoice obstruents in those positions (as they devoiced *all* obstruents in general).
>>-- Yep. You and Wiki seem to be right.
I'm not very knowledgeable about schweitzerdeutsch, but in a second thought I remember that in Alsace and Baden-Wurttemberg (Alemannic area) there are a lot of family names ending with '-oog' (Woog, Moog) as well as toponyms (Roeschwoog, Alsace) whereby the final '-g' is definitely voiced.<<
Don't count on orthography, whether formal or informal, to be very informative about voicing in Upper German dialects, whether Alemannic or Austro-Bavarian; in such dialects whether "voiceless" or "voiced" consonant symbols do not actually have anything to do with voicing per se, but rather are related to quantity, and in certain positions in Austro-Bavarian, aspiration.
Well, strictly speaking, I should have said that Alemannic dialects of MHG did not have final devoicing in that they did not have neutralization of fortis-lenis pairs in final positions, not that they did not truly devoice obstruents in those positions (as they devoiced *all* obstruents in general).
>>-- Yep. You and Wiki seem to be right.
I'm not very knowledgeable about schweitzerdeutsch, but in a second thought I remember that in Alsace and Baden-Wurttemberg (Alemannic area) there are a lot of family names ending with '-oog' (Woog, Moog) as well as toponyms (Roeschwoog, Alsace) whereby the final '-g' is definitely voiced.<<
Don't count on orthography, whether formal or informal, to be very informative about voicing in Upper German dialects, whether Alemannic or Austro-Bavarian; in such dialects whether "voiceless" or "voiced" consonant symbols do not actually have anything to do with voicing per se, but rather are related to quantity, and in certain positions in Austro-Bavarian, aspiration.
A German once called me something which sounded like "aarsh xisht". I still wonder what it actually means.
<<A German once called me something which sounded like "aarsh xisht". I still wonder what it actually means. >>
Did it sound like "Arsch Gesicht"?
Did it sound like "Arsch Gesicht"?
<<Did it sound like "Arsch Gesicht"? >>
if so, then it wasn't a compliment. it means "Ass Face"
sorry : (
if so, then it wasn't a compliment. it means "Ass Face"
sorry : (