The English had him in the past, they even write to him: to laugh, knight, night, thought ect.The Scots have kept that G, but no longer in such words, because they are too enguned. It is just a Germanic sound that has been worn away in many other languages and not with us.
It’s not the same G, just listen well and compare.The Arab g is harder and more guttural. The Dutch G also has two variants, one voiceless and one voiced.
Also the Hebrew g is more akin to that of the Arabs.The Hebrew and ivrite are as languages quite far from Dutch, also grammatically speaking. Taking over sounds sometimes peoples of other peoples/languages, but only if they are dominant, like here the American version of English. Jewish languages have never been dominant in our country.
I am not a connoisseur of Arabic, but during listening I never struck a voice-bearing g as in our word count.For example, voiceless is the ch in echo.
And then listen to the voiceless gh in the name of the infamous Arab Abu-Ghraib imprisoned… a lot deeper and scender yet.
The hard G in the north of the Netherlands does not resemble the G in Semitic languages in the furthest distance.
So it may not have been overgenom .
Originally, the Dutch G was the same as that of German and English.In Middle Dutch, the G has also been gentle above the rivers. Of course, Jews have ever come to the Netherlands, but if they have taken the hard G (that sound as if you are strangled, I mean), it seems difficult to ascertain. But it may be. Whether it is probable is another very different story. Such sounds are also in Arabic.
Not long ago I was at the AH2go at Amsterdam CS and behind the checkout was a blushing, blond, very Amsterdam-looking boy.He spoke to me with a heavy Moroccan accent: a much harder G than in normal Dutch occurs, a razor-sharp Z and very open-sounding vowels.
It does not answer this question, but it seemed to me an interesting observation in the light of the question: adoption of foreign accents in our language.In any case, I found it special and really charming: I love the sharpness of our language, and it is emphasized in this accent, while almost all the accents make our language softer and, as far as I am concerned, make our language less beautiful.
As Israeli with Dutch background I can confirm that the sharp Dutch 鈧?虄g of the Northern Netherlands does not occur in the Semitic languages.
In the Iwrith (modern Hebrew) are two G-sounds, the 鈧?艙get 鈧?脳 -and the 鈧?艙gaf 鈧?脳 – The latter is most similar to the Dutch 鈧?艙g 鈧?The first is more guttural and by the Sephardic Jews who came from the Arab-speaking countries much clearer (also more correctly) more like a 鈧?艙gh 鈧?pronounced from deep in the throat coming.
Conversely, Israeli (with the necessary difficulty) can speak English completely accentingly.I have encountered an Israeli in the Netherlands and could not notice his language that it was not his mother tongue….
I myself come from Limburg and Dutch here in Israel can immediately discover my Limburg 鈧?艙g 鈧?if I speak Iwrith.
It is not imitable and there are also no indications that the Protestants of the 16th and 17th century have taken over the sharp 鈧?艙g 鈧?of the upcoming Sephardic Jews.
No, we had long and wide before we had Protestants or Jews in the Netherlands.The latter were also not Sephardic.
I have also thought about that.
I think it is very possible, too much because many European Jews were persecuted in Catholic areas.They were probably safer in northern, Protestant areas. For instance, the inhabitants of these territories may have taken over this hard G from Jewish refugees who originally came from Catholic territories.
I once heard that Amsterdammers spoke with a soft G centuries ago, whether this was really so is of course difficult to prove, but it is not impossible and even plausible.