Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:31:14 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> scribeva:

>On Sunday, August 21, 2022 at 8:33:27 AM UTC-7, Tim Lang wrote:
>> On 21.08.2022 14:34, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>
>> >Dutch <ui> is a diphthong, from half open to closed, almost front,
>> >rounded. Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>> >in the ü of German Brücke.
>>>
>[yœ] or [yø]?

[œy]

>Either of those starts closed and progresses to more open.
>So, "half open to closed" looks like an incorrect description.

No, correct.

You may be puzzled by the spelling <ui>. In that, the <i> was
originally probably a length indicator, for what was then still [y:].
The diphthongization happened later. And in some dialects never at
all.
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:51:26 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> scribeva:

>On Sunday, August 21, 2022 at 5:34:46 AM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>
>> Dutch <ui> is a diphthong, from half open to closed, almost front,
>> rounded.
>
>[œy].
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Dutch>
>AFAIK, [œj] would be identical.

No. A French oeuil (meaning eye) and a Dutch ui (meaning onion) are
noticeably different. The French one gradually unrounds, in Dutch it
doesn't.

>>Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>> in the ü of German Brücke.
>
>You got the start and end backwards.

No, you have, it seems.

By "start" I mean what comes first in time. Do you do too?

--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.com

On 2022-08-23, Ruud Harmsen <rh@rudhar.com> wrote:

> You may be puzzled by the spelling <ui>. In that, the <i> was
> originally probably a length indicator, for what was then still [y:].

Yep. The letter 'i' as a length marker is conserved in a number
of German place names in the region bordering the Netherlands. This
produces some surprising pronunciations, e.g.:

Duisburg /ˈdyːsbʊrk/
Grevenbroich /ˌgreːvənˈbroːx/
Troisdorf /ˈtroːsdɔrf/

--
Christian "naddy" Weisgerber naddy@mips.inka.de

Tue, 23 Aug 2022 16:59:33 -0000 (UTC): Christian Weisgerber
<naddy@mips.inka.de> scribeva:

>On 2022-08-23, Ruud Harmsen <rh@rudhar.com> wrote:
>
>> You may be puzzled by the spelling <ui>. In that, the <i> was
>> originally probably a length indicator, for what was then still [y:].
>
>Yep. The letter 'i' as a length marker is conserved in a number
>of German place names in the region bordering the Netherlands. This
>produces some surprising pronunciations, e.g.:
>
>Duisburg /?dy?sb?rk/
>Grevenbroich /?gre?v?n?bro?x/
>Troisdorf /?tro?sd?rf/

And in the Netherlands: Goirle, Oisterwijk, Zonnemaire. Also e
sometime, modern waar used to be written waer. Cf. Soest in Germany:
[zo:st].

On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 2:11:00 AM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:31:14 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
> <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> scribeva:
> >On Sunday, August 21, 2022 at 8:33:27 AM UTC-7, Tim Lang wrote:
> >> On 21.08.2022 14:34, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> >>
> >> >Dutch <ui> is a diphthong, from half open to closed, almost front,
> >> >rounded. Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
> >> >in the ü of German Brücke.
> >>>
> >[yœ] or [yø]?
>
> [œy]
>
> >Either of those starts closed and progresses to more open.
> >So, "half open to closed" looks like an incorrect description.
>
> No, correct.
>
If one of your statements is right, the other is wrong:

[œy] is right:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Dutch>
[œj] would be identical to my ear.
That's the pronunciation of French oeil
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%93il

Why not say that your <ui> is pronounced like French <oeil>?

> > Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
> > in the ü of German Brücke.

Why is it necessary to say that it ends in the ü of German?
Do [œy] and [œj] sound different enough to you
that you have to introduce Brücke into the description?

> You may be puzzled by the spelling <ui>. In that, the <i> was
> originally probably a length indicator, for what was then still [y:].
> The diphthongization happened later. And in some dialects never at
> all.
> --
Some dialects pronounce it as [y:]?
.... which is comprehensible to those who say it as [œy]?

Op 29/08/2022 om 4:39 schreef Dingbat:
> On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 2:11:00 AM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:31:14 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
>> <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> scribeva:
>>> On Sunday, August 21, 2022 at 8:33:27 AM UTC-7, Tim Lang wrote:
>>>> On 21.08.2022 14:34, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dutch <ui> is a diphthong, from half open to closed, almost front,
>>>>> rounded. Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>>>>> in the ü of German Brücke.
>>>>>
>>> [yœ] or [yø]?
>>
>> [œy]
>>
>>> Either of those starts closed and progresses to more open.
>>> So, "half open to closed" looks like an incorrect description.
>>
>> No, correct.
>>
> If one of your statements is right, the other is wrong:
>
> [œy] is right:
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Dutch>
> [œj] would be identical to my ear.
> That's the pronunciation of French oeil
> https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%93il
>
> Why not say that your <ui> is pronounced like French <oeil>?

I did say it.

>>> Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>>> in the ü of German Brücke.
>
> Why is it necessary to say that it ends in the ü of German?
> Do [œy] and [œj] sound different enough to you
> that you have to introduce Brücke into the description?

It does when followed by a consonant. The [j] part gets more rounded, to
[y]~ü.
Bui, buien ~ [bœj], [bœj@(n)] or even [bœ-j@(n)] (un-diphthongised) (°)
Huis, huizen ~ [hœys], [hœyz@(n)]

(°) Present-day lang-wizzes merely describe all ui with [œy]. I don't
agree with this.

Many Dutch, in a permanent effort to 'sound trendy', are now pronouncing
(among many other oddities) ui with a -w glide: bui, buien ~ [bœyw],
[bœyw@]. If some time that would become standard, by then Flemish will
have drifted from Dutch.

--
guido wugi

Sun, 28 Aug 2022 19:39:54 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
<ranjit_mathews@yahoo.com> scribeva:

>On Tuesday, August 23, 2022 at 2:11:00 AM UTC-7, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Sun, 21 Aug 2022 17:31:14 -0700 (PDT): Dingbat
>> <ranjit_...@yahoo.com> scribeva:
>> >On Sunday, August 21, 2022 at 8:33:27 AM UTC-7, Tim Lang wrote:
>> >> On 21.08.2022 14:34, Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >Dutch <ui> is a diphthong, from half open to closed, almost front,
>> >> >rounded. Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>> >> >in the ü of German Brücke.
>> >>>
>> >[yœ] or [yø]?
>>
>> [œy]
>>
>> >Either of those starts closed and progresses to more open.
>> >So, "half open to closed" looks like an incorrect description.
>>
>> No, correct.
>>
>If one of your statements is right, the other is wrong:
>
>[œy] is right:
><https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:IPA/Dutch>
>[œj] would be identical to my ear.
>That's the pronunciation of French oeil
>https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%C5%93il
>
>Why not say that your <ui> is pronounced like French <oeil>?

Because there is a subtle difference: liprounding is gradually reduced
in French, not in Dutch.

>> > Starts with the first element of French oeil (eye), and ends
>> > in the ü of German Brücke.
>
>Why is it necessary to say that it ends in the ü of German?

Because it is fact.

>Do [œy] and [œj] sound different enough to you
>that you have to introduce Brücke into the description?

They do sound different, and diphthongs in Dutch (and a lot of other
languages) have the same liprounding throughout, so saying it is like
in French would ne misleading.

>> You may be puzzled by the spelling <ui>. In that, the <i> was
>> originally probably a length indicator, for what was then still [y:].
>> The diphthongization happened later. And in some dialects never at
>> all.
>> --
>Some dialects pronounce it as [y:]?

Yes. Or [y], or even [u], which is an even older form of such words.

>... which is comprehensible to those who say it as [œy]?

If you are somewhat familiar with the dialect, a lot of it is
understandable, yes.

On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:16:42 PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:
> A recent development in deciphering linear Elamite
> <https://www.dw.com/en/archaeological-mystery-ancient-elamite-script-from-iran-deciphered/a-62849976>

Another article:
<https://www.livescience.com/ancient-linear-elamite-writing-deciphered>

On Tuesday, August 30, 2022 at 11:08:25 PM UTC-4, Dingbat wrote:
> On Friday, August 19, 2022 at 10:16:42 PM UTC-7, Dingbat wrote:
> > A recent development in deciphering linear Elamite
> > <https://www.dw.com/en/archaeological-mystery-ancient-elamite-script-from-iran-deciphered/a-62849976>
> Another article:
> <https://www.livescience.com/ancient-linear-elamite-writing-deciphered>

https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=56019#more-56019