Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Renia <renia@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 02 May 2009 19:17:08 +0300
Skraedder wrote:
Steve Hayes wrote:On Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:59:47 +0100, Graeme <Graeme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Before the mid-1920s documents in the South African archives were written in
Dutch and English, and only after that were they written in Afrikaans, which
more closely resembled the spoken language, showing that even when the written
language was the same, the accents were different.
Before I first visited the Netherlands I bought a book on the language, and
was quite surprised to learn that the Dutch word "uitsmijter" (ham and eggs -
literally bouncer) was pronounced like the English "out smiter".
Afrikaans doesn't have the term (at least not referring to ham and eggs), but
it would be pronounced quite differently from Dutch. "ui" is a diphthong, with
no equivalent sound in English, pronounced "ur-ee", and "smyter" would be
pronounced "smayter", not "smiter".
When I learnt Afrikaans in Cape Town back in the '60s I'm pretty sure such niceties were pretty much ignored. It would have been pronounced 'Ayt Smayter'.
Skraedder
I had a friend at school in GB in the 60s called van der Westhuizen, pronounced Westhayzen.
.
- References:
- As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Jeff
- Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Mick Gurling
- Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Richard van Schaik
- Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Graeme
- Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Steve Hayes
- Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- From: Skraedder
- As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- Prev by Date: Re: Historical currency converter
- Next by Date: Re: 1984 death help?
- Previous by thread: Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- Next by thread: Re: As if Genealogy isn't confusing enough
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading