Talk:Dutch phrasebook

Untitled

http://nextens.uvt.nl/ has some open source dutch text to speech - might be good to link to it from here or perhaps even use it to create some audio samples to host here?

Eeep -- things are moving fast on the Phrasebook front, eh? I did a first pass at a phrasebook template -- comments welcome, of course. -- (WT-en) Evan 13:16, 16 Oct 2003 (PDT)

At first sight it looks pretty good. I'll see what comments I come up with after applying it to this phrasebook. I already have one question: what would be the best way to indicate sounds that don't occur in English, like the Dutch 'g' and 'ch' (the last one is the same as in Scottish 'loch')? (WT-en) D.D. 13:22, 16 Oct 2003 (PDT)

You know, I never did figure out how to do this. I always think of the "g" in Dutch as sounding most like someone saying "ech!" in disgust. Anyways, this article is coming along swimmingly -- I'm very happy with it. -- (WT-en) Evan 14:22, 2 Nov 2003 (PST)

Thanks a lot Evan! I'll try to work on it during the next few days. It's not always easy to describe the pronunciation from an English speaker's point. I hope everything is "pronouncable" though ;-) (WT-en) D.D. 14:31, 2 Nov 2003 (PST)

One more request: When you get done, please give a brief editorial onceover to the phrasebook template and check to see which phrases were a pain, which were missing (like "one-way" and "round-trip" -- good catch), etc. I'll try and do it, too, but I know I'm going to miss some. -- (WT-en) Evan 15:01, 3 Nov 2003 (PST)

No problem, Evan. I'll do what I can. (WT-en) D.D. 09:03, 4 Nov 2003 (PST)

About beers and pints: I'm not sure if the English pint corresponds to the Dutch pintje. Isn't pint a certain amount of beer? Here in Flanders we generally call a normal glass of beer a pintje. BTW, Guaka, I'm so glad you translated orange juice as sinaasappelsap instead of the dreadful "Dutch" jus d'orange ;-) (WT-en) D.D. 22:31, 4 Nov 2003 (PST)

The Dutch say "sorry" same as we do? I expected "zorgig" - or does that mean "careful"? -(WT-en) phma

The Dutch and the Flemings do. Dutch is a language which easily accepts words from other languages. For example, we have verbs that we took almost literally from English: updaten, linken, saven, racen, ... It is probably right to say that we Flemings try to be a bit more "pure" than the Dutch. E.g. Aquaplaning in the Netherlands is watergladheid ("water slipperiness") in Flanders. The word zorgig does not exist in Dutch. But you weren't far of the mark because zorg means "care" ("careful" translates as voorzichtig). (WT-en) DhDh 13:10, 5 Dec 2003 (PST)

"Since many Dutch and Flemish people like to practice their foreign languages it is very difficult to learn more than the basics. You will notice that even after having reached a reasonable level people continue to respond in English after having started the conversation in Dutch." In Scandinavia we say that Dutch people don't like to speak English... I don't know if that is true. But to say that Dutch people prefer speaking English is not my experience... 9.mai 2006

"In Flanders it is much more common to use the polite form than in the Netherlands, where it is nowadays mostly reserved to address elderly people."

Is this correct? "U" might be used more often in Flemish than in Dutch, but this doesn't mean it's used as a formal way of saying "je, jij" (you). In most cases it is the accusative of "ge/gij" and has nothing to do with formal use.

Good night

Good night. in Dutch translates as Goedenacht. You can use it even to a night porter in the middle of his shift. Slaap lekker or more formal welterusten is Dutch for sleep well.--(WT-en) Rein N. 03:35, 24 December 2007 (EST)

External links

Indonesia

Latest comment: 6 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I'm not sure if we should colour Indonesia on the map. Indonesia may have been a Dutch colony, but almost nobody speaks Dutch there these days. If you don't speak Indonesian, you'll generally have much better luck trying English than Dutch even though neither is widely spoken. The dog2 (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely. Indonesians who speak Dutch would be either people who already learned the language before 1949 and are still alive or people who moved to the Netherlands and then came back. I don't think we're talking about a large number of people at all. I'll bet more people living in the Netherlands speak Indonesian than people living in Indonesia speak Dutch. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 2 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Pronunciation of "G"

Latest comment: 3 years ago11 comments2 people in discussion

I'm seeing "G" and "GH", but my brief experience in the Netherlands and with Dutch people is that the accurate sound is "kh" like "ch" in "loch," so that, for example, Gouda is "Khow-dah." We should be careful to avoid misleading readers. Your comments, please? Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:40, 5 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Ikan Kekek: How the G sounds depends on the region. For the sake of simplification, there are three versions:

Sharp G: /ɣ/, between "Loch" and the gargling of water. If voiced correctly, there should be some tissue in the back of your throat vibrating while voicing the G.
Soft G: /x/, 1:1 with CH in "Loch" (I can't find a proper sound file of this).
American G: /g/, Like "Ghost" and your example of "Khow-dah", sounds more like a K than anything.

(1) is the norm for standard Dutch. (2) is the regional variant of North-Brabant, Limburg and Flanders. (3) is a way that I have only ever heard foreigners pronounce it. If any of these are wrong, it would be (3). (1) and (2) are both totally acceptable. Personally I have a lousy sharp G (minimal vibrations in the throat while voicing), which is more or less a mid-way between (1) and (2). I would approximate both (1) and (2) as "GH".

For the sake of readability and consistency, I think all instances of G in the approximations should be turned into GH. There might be an exception to the rule here or there, but I don't think it'll pose a problem. It would also stand out a bit as opposed to just "G", which can remind the reader subconsciously that the sound for a Dutch G is not what they know it as. Wauteurz (talk) 00:36, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

The first example sounds like "kh" to me, too. I realize it's not as sharp as it could be (Yiddish "ch" is sharper than the example, but my experience in Amsterdam was that Dutch "g" was pretty much just like Yiddish "ch"), but "gh" is a voiced "kh" that is used, for example, in Arabic. I don't think "gh" approximates either of the first 2 sounds. Also, "kh" does not sound like "k", except when we're talking about the Indian style of adding a "h" to the end of a consonant, which is not the default meaning of "kh" nor the sound I mean to indicate with "kh." Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

The thing is that to me, representing the Dutch G with a "KH" would imply that there's a clicking sound of sorts in there, which there is not. The letter K is simply too associated with a click-sound for it to make sense. I think the same can be said for English speakers, but I'm not a native speaker so my perspective might be skewed on that front. Compare for example the pronunciations of "Ghost" and "Coast" in US-English. There isn't a lot of difference to set the two apart - both make or approximate a click.

I'm speculating here, but I think that to non-Dutch speakers, the difference between a "sharp G" and what I dubbed the "American G" is simply too faint in normal speech, though both are voiced completely differently in the mouth. There is definitely an over-exaggerated version of it, but you wouldn't over-exaggerate your pronunciation in normal conversation. /g/ sits at the front of the mouth, against the teeth. /ɣ/ gets formed in the throat. To make this all a bit more confusing, /g/ is also the sound used for the Dutch pronunciation of the letter K (and occasionally C as well). It doesn't help that English has no real counterpart to a sharp G, meaning that English speakers aren't going to be familiar with the sound. This without a doubt leads to misunderstandings with our audience in some cases.

I should note though, that at the end of the day the pronunciation doesn't matter a whole lot in practical use as a tourist. Most places that tourists visit speak English (near-)fluently, and especially in the larger cities (most notably Amsterdam), there are a surprising amount of places that don't even have staff that speak Dutch. No decent Dutchman is going to treat you worse if you mispronounce a sharp G as a "K". If anything, they'll be a bit flattered that you're attempting to speak the language of the place you're visiting. It think that the best that we can do, is to make it clear that this isn't a G as it is known in English.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 13:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

There is no clicking sound in "kh", and you should not judge what a combination of letters looks like to a Dutch person as being the same reaction an English-speaker would have. Is there a clicking sound in "loch"? Also, the difference between "ghost" and "coast" is simply that the "gh" in "ghost," which is pronounced as if it were a hard "g", is voiced and the "c" in "coast" (=k) is not. As for arguments about the practicality of learning any Dutch, if you'd like to argue that this phrasebook should be deleted as unnecessary, go ahead, but I would disagree because in a long weekend I spent in Amsterdam, I met 5 people who spoke Dutch and little to know English. And besides, it's important for Americans to know how to pronounce "Gouda" correctly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

This discussion has derailed a bit here. Here are the facts as I am presenting them to you:

I did not link a sound file for the "Ch in Loch"-version in my original comment because Wiktionary only lists the British English pronunciation, which sounds like "Lock". Therefore, yes, in British English, which I have been taught and have spoken since I was a little kid, there is a clicking sound in the word "Loch", or it is an accepted variant of the word's pronunciation. That clicking sound does not get used in the Scots pronunciation though, which is why I argue that a "Dutch G" sounds like the "-ch" in "Loch". Loch is after all a word that originates in Scots, and has been imported into English from Scots.
"GH" is in my opinion the best approximation of a "Dutch G". Personally, I see no acceptable alternatives to that, most certainly not letters or combinations of letters that might throw the reader off because they associate a different sound with that letter, such as a K. Something I might agree to is representing the sound with a letter that is not used in major languages, and is therefore largely independent of sound associations. For example: ×.

As for your last reply, I'll say nothing other than that a place is not frozen in time when you're not visiting it. Your user page says you last visited my country in 2013. I don't know if that's your most recent visit to my country, but a lot can change in almost a decade. I visit Amsterdam in specific a few times per year. As for people speaking languages in Amsterdam: I am not arguing that:

People in Amsterdam (and other major cities) don't speak Dutch.
People in Amsterdam (and other major cities) speak English fluently.
This phrasebook serves no purpose and should be deleted.

Based on my own experiences, I am saying that:

Businesses (mostly shops and restaurants) in city centres of several major cities employ expats, and sometimes only expats. Expats in the Netherlands have, generally speaking, a limited understanding of Dutch, which is not sufficient for them to have a full conversation in Dutch, but enough to understand the essence of what you're saying.
Learning Dutch is not a necessity for a stay in the Netherlands. There is a reason why we consistently rank at the top of the board when it comes to English proficiency. You might encounter people that don't speak English in a full enough capacity to talk to you, but there will in 98% of all those scenarios be someone nearby that is willing to fulfil the role of interpreter. In general, most people under the age of 60 and almost everyone between the age of 15 and 40 will speak English in a good enough capacity to understand you and talk back to you.
Learning Dutch is, because of English proficiency in the Netherlands, no more than a gesture of politeness when staying in the Netherlands, even if it's only a simple "Dankjewel".

The above however, is a discussion in and of itself, so let's put that to the side. If you want to have that argument with me, feel free, but not in this thread.

Other than that, I am not responding to anything else you said, because to me, it comes across as highly sarcastic. I am not here to feed trolls, and you putting words in my mouth definitely qualifies as taking the piss. That might well not be your intention, but it's how it comes across to me, and I am not having any of it.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 20:59, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please believe me when I say that no sarcasm is intended, I'm sorry I was misunderstood to be sarcastic, and I apologize for unintentionally giving that misimpression. The Scottish pronunciation of "loch" is not similar to "lock". The relationship between kh and gh is the same as the relationship between k and hard g - the first (pair of) letter(s) is unvoiced and the second is voiced. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

We're all good, don't worry. I think we're on the same page again. Just to be sure though, you're suggesting that we approximate the Dutch G's approximation with "KH", right? There's one problem with that, which is the ambiguity of the letter K that I brought up before. Sure, the Dutch G can sound like it to untrained ears, I get that, and I am not saying that it is wrong for non-natives to approximate the sound like that. People can catch on quite easily that you don't speak the language well, as there are other letters and letter combinations that you will trip over as well. Still, there will be people putting significant effort into their pronunciation, and you would be teaching them something close but inaccurate by using "KH". To give some examples of how this corrupts speech:

"Nog" (still, yet) → nokh → "Nok" (pitch (of a roof))
"Mag" (may) → makh → "Mak" (tame, domesticated)
"Gerecht" (dish / court of law) → KHUH-rekht → "Gerekt" (stretched)
"Graag" (please) → khraakh → "Kraak" (crack, break / breaking and entering)
"Geld" (money) → khelt → "Kelt" (Celt)
"Goedkoper" (cheaper) → khoot-KOWE-pur → "Koet-koper" (someone that buys coots)
"Licht" (light) / "Ligt" (lightweight, lying down) → likht → "Likt" ([is] licking)

Some of these are a bit of a stretch, but you get the idea. There are definitely accents that replace some G's with K's, but they're far from common or standard. A phrasebook on Dutch should strive to teach the pronunciation of standard Dutch as best as possible, not a local variation thereof. There are some instances of the G where this wouldn't prove a problem at all (mostly when closing a word, I think), but I think it's best practise to just avoid the ambiguity all-together and stick with "G" or "GH".
-- Wauteurz (talk) 11:44, 7 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

The thing is, are you suggesting that Dutch people really pronounce "g" like an English "g" in "go" or "gh" in "ghost"? Because I believe either of this pseudo-transliterations will confuse English-speakers, whereas "kh" is much less likely to do so. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:12, 7 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I am not, no. I am saying that while "KH" might seem a natural approximation of the sound, it would in my opinion be better to represent it with "GH", since the G in itself is a closer sound, with the H adding some length to the sound. It's still not fully accurate, but interpreting "GH" as an equivalent to its usage in English, such as in "Ghost", wouldn't be right. I think the original intention of "GH" would have been because of elements of both letters. The G gives the general concept of the sound, the H gives it its length. If it isn't yet presented as such, it possibly should be.

Having learnt how to pronounce the Dutch G myself when I was a considerably younger person, I can tell you that I learnt to pronounce it by gargling water (or compare it to using mouthwash). When you remove the fluid involved, what you're left with is pretty much a Dutch G. I should say that that only goes for the 'northern' pronunciation though. I think the closest equivalent to a Flemish G would be the French word "Je", but I haven't had a lot of exposure to Flemish, just Brabantic and Limburgish dialects, so my perception might be skewed here.

Also, I finally stumbled across sound files that compare 'northern' Dutch and Flemish Dutch pronunciations of the word "Geeuw" (yawn), and I am pretty certain that you'll agree that the resemblance to "KH" is a lot less present.

I know the discussion has been had before, but would it be worthwhile to add a soundfile where we explain the pronunciation of the sounds? I think that omits a lot of the ambiguity that exists around representing this in text. If you can refer to a sound file, you can get away with having a not 100%-accurate representation, which, I'm sorry to say, isn't going to be achievable here.
-- Wauteurz (talk) 00:23, 8 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely on the sound files! And thanks for being patient with the discussion. I'm good with this. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 8 November 2021 (UTC)Reply