# Pronunciation of "e"



## bieq

Hello,

I have a question about the pronunciation of "e" in some words. I am studying Dutch on my own and, so far, I have learned that in order to know whether a vowel is either short or long, we must divide the word into syllables. For example, if we take the word "afmeting" and divide it into syllables, we get "af-me-ting". Therefore, the vowel *a* is short, because it's followed by the consonant* f*, and the vowel *e* is an open vowel, which makes it a long vowel. So, the phonetic transcription for this word is [ɑfmeːtɪɳ] (which I have also heard as [ɑfmeˑitɪɳ]).

Now, my problem is about longer words containing more than one vowel "e", such as "reserveren". Dividing this word into syllables gives us “re-ser-ve-ren”, which I transcribe as [reˑisiːrveˑirə] (or maybe [reˑisiːrvərə]?), but is this right? Besides, I learned that when “e” is followed by “r”, then it becomes [iː], but is this right, too?

I was thinking that the vowel *e* is transcribed as [ə] when unstressed, as in the last syllable of “reserveren” and transcribed as [eː] (or [eˑi]) when it’s a long vowel and [ɛ] when it’s short, as in [mɛt]. Could this be possible? 

Thank you in advance!

Ben


​​


----------



## Grytolle

I'd say [reˑsɛrveˑrə(n)]


----------



## Joannes

Grytolle said:


> I'd say [reˑsɛrveˑrə(n)]


You meant to write [reˑ*z*ɛr'veˑrə(n)], I'm sure. For Belgium that would be the _standard_ pronunciation. But many people say [r*ɛ*zɛr'veˑrə(n)].



bieq said:


> Besides, I learned that when “e” is followed by “r”, then it becomes [iː], but is this right, too?


No, I don't think so, not in any variant I know anyway. What may happen in the Netherlands is that /e/ becomes [ɪ] when it _follows_ after /r/.



bieq said:


> I was thinking that the vowel *e* is transcribed as [ə] when unstressed, as in the last syllable of “reserveren” and transcribed as [eː] (or [eˑi]) when it’s a long vowel and [ɛ] when it’s short, as in [mɛt]. Could this be possible?


You will know the difference between /e/ and /ɛ/ by spelling (as you correctly explained in your first paragraph ). But mind you, both /e/ and /ɛ/ may appear in unstressed syllables, and spelling will not always be conclusive (even when we exclude non standard pronunciations). In neither *resident* nor *reportage*, the stress is on the first syllable, however the first syllable of the former is pronounced /re/ while it is pronounced /rə/ in the latter (in Standard Dutch that is!).



bieq said:


> So, the phonetic transcription for this word is [ɑfmeːtɪɳ] (which I have also heard as [ɑfmeˑitɪɳ]).


It's [ŋ], not [ɳ]. The diphtongized pronunciation pronunciation of /eˑ/ as [eˑɪ] is only common in the Netherlands.


----------



## bieq

Hey, Joannes,

Thank you. Now, I still have some questions. I found out this website which provides audio files for the Dutch language. Would you please be so kind to tell me whether it's a good website or not?

http://www.acapela-group.com/text-to-speech-interactive-demo.html

I listented to the word "reserveren", but the audio doesn't match with the phonetic transcription you gave me.

I am a bit confused about the vowel "e" when it's before the consonant "r", such as "meer" or "verkeerd"... How do you transcribe these words? I listened to the audio on this website and I would transcribe them as [miːr] and not [mɪr] and [vər'kiːrt] and not [vər'kɪrt]... This is confusing! 

Thank you so much again.

Ben



PS: Yes, I meant [ŋ], not [ɳ]. I just didn't realize I'd picked the wrong symbol.
PS2: I tend to use the length marks [ː] in order to state a vowel is long, but on this other website that I found, they don't. Do I have to use the length marks or not in Dutch phonology? http://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=SpellingAndPronunciation.09


----------



## Frank06

Hi,

As far as I understood,
- the Flemish speaker (BE) says: [rezɛr'veˑrə]
- the Dutch female female says: [rezər'veˑrə] (with a different kind of [r], but that's not the point here.)
- the Dutch male speaker says [re:zər'veˑrə] (first e-sound is quite (much too?) long.



bieq said:


> I would transcribe them as [miːr] and not [mɪr]


- The sound file of the Flemish speaker, which does sound like [mɪr], is definitely messed up and not representative at all.

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Joannes

bieq said:


> Hey, Joannes,
> 
> Thank you. Now, I still have some questions. I found out this website which provides audio files for the Dutch language. Would you please be so kind to tell me whether it's a good website or not?
> 
> http://www.acapela-group.com/text-to-speech-interactive-demo.html


I know the website. It very much depends on the input. Compounds tend to be terrible and sentences often have very wrong intonation. Tbh, I think you should rather listen to radio or tv broadcasts on line – but of course that doesn’t really help if you want to know the pronunciation of one specific word that is not very common.



bieq said:


> I listented to the word "reserveren", but the audio doesn't match with the phonetic transcription you gave me.


I'd say it does as far as the Flemish speaker is concerned. I agree with Frank’s transcriptions. (Regarding consonants, I’d say that, as a Belgian speaker, Sophie pronounces /z/ and /v/ too strong, more like /s/ and /f/. And of course there’s the difference in /r/s.)



bieq said:


> I am a bit confused about the vowel "e" when it's before the consonant "r", such as "meer" or "verkeerd"... How do you transcribe these words? I listened to the audio on this website and I would transcribe them as [miːr] and not [mɪr] and [vər'kiːrt] and not [vər'kɪrt]... This is confusing!


No, [i:] definitely is too sharp. (Compare to how the Acapela people pronounce *mier*) – Anyway, from a practical point of view, I would advise you to not imitate any of these particularities yet as overdoing them would make yourself totally incomprehensible: just say /e:/. There will be more important pronunciation difficulties for you now, like getting the differences between /h/, /x/ and /ɣ/ right, and the vowels /yˑ/, /øˑ/ and /œˑy/ …



Frank06 said:


> - The sound file of the Flemish speaker, which does sound like [mɪr], is definitely messed up and not representative at all.


In isolation, I agree, it’s too short (vowels are supposed to be the longest when preceding /r/) and too /ɪ/ like that – but I think *meer* is one of those words that could have a reduced pronunciation in entire sentences.



bieq said:


> PS2: I tend to use the length marks [ː] in order to state a vowel is long, but on this other website that I found, they don't. Do I have to use the length marks or not in Dutch phonology? [URL]http://www.dutchgrammar.com/en/?n=SpellingAndPronunciation.09[/URL]


There are no phonemic distinctions in Dutch phonology based on quantity, i.e. on length. But there _are_ in many dialects and in Standard Dutch as well there are quite some intricacies with regard to vowel length so it’s a good thing to include it in your transcription. (I think we’ve had a thread about this before… Here it is, and this is another one.)



Grytolle said:


> If you're asked to transcribe "room" and "dom", you could, within the reach of AN, get [rom] and [dom], which of course is misleading, since [o] is long in the first example


Hm, [roˑm] and [dɔm] right? So in theory the length marks aren't necessary in this example. (But I agree with you that it's better to put them anyway.)


----------



## bieq

Thank you again for the patience and good explanations.

Ben


----------

