To me his ‘Hebrew’ sounds Arabic. 
English only sounds “neutral” because it’s your native language. I could easily make the argument that English sounds much harsher than German, for example due all the hard T’s and P’s, most of of which have softened into s/ts and f/pf in German. And as mentioned above, I think you’re overemphasizing the stress put on the “ach” sound–it’s not a hacking-up-a-lung sound, but a consonant like any other, and a pretty common one across the languages of the world (even some variants of English). Also, bear in mind that the German CH takes two forms–the "harsher"ach-laut (which only appears after A, O, and U, both in their long and short, but not their umlauted forms) and the much “softer” ich-laut, which appears after all other vowels, after all consonants, and at the beginning of words if followed by “E” or “I”.
In any case, here’s an audio clip of a “neutral-”(or even pleasant-) sounding “nacht”, and a harsh “night”. Now, you may argue that I’m deliberately harshifying the English word here–and indeed I am–but my point is that judging from your phonetic transcription, you’re almost certainly doing the same thing to the German word, especially if you think that Rammstein is at all representative of how normal, spoken German sounds (a proposition as absurd as suggesting that any English-language metal band is a good example of the sound of normal, spoken English).
French I can’t really comment on, as I admittedly don’t know much about the finer points of French pronunciation. I will say this, though–if you think French always sounds melodious, listen to an infuriated Frenchman some time. Any language will sound terrible if you shout it–we’ve just become culturally predisposed to assume that certain languages are always meant to be shouted.
The French “R” sounds like you’re hacking up a lung. R is generally a tricky/dissonant letter.
Close: “I speak Spanish to God, Italian to women, French to men and German to my horse.”
And that was not necessarily a comment on the sonorous qualities of the language… rather, their orbs of influence… The Spanish Church, The Italian noblesse, the nation, and the finest warhorse known to man (lippazaner).
I will seduce you with Eichendorff and fick Sie Affengeil.
Saugeil is a German word I don’t like. Sow Horny just isn’t romantic enough for my English Wordbank.
But will do you affengeil… ape horny.
Or maybe like an old Goat… Alte Bock! Geiler Bock!(accusatorily)
The technical term is that the terminal /t/ is usually unreleased in American English.
Medial /t/ assumes three different allophones in (most forms of) American English:
/t/ => /ɾ/ (the flap or tap)
as in *writer*, *water*, ect.
/t/ => /Ɂ/ (glottal stop)
as in *bottle*
and /t/ => /Ǿ/ (“null”)
as in *center*, *Santa Clause*
Whether or not these sounds (or lack of sound in the case of null) are less “aggressive” than BBC English, I don’t really know.
Alot of you quote that the aggressiveness is not at all the language but entirely the tone which is not true. When you are talking one on one with a person it is indeed the tone, but if you are talking about the world, then you must understand, that not all the english speak with the same tone, same with the italian, etc… It then becomes a question of social psychology studied by sociologists and anthropologists. The most aggressive language are english, german and russian. The least aggressive languages are the latin derived ones. French, spanish, italian, portuguese, romanian, catalan, occitan etc. It has even been hypothecised by sociology, anthopology researchers that if the english language would not have rised like it did and that the french language would have stayed as the dominant one in eastern europe, that most of the wars in the western hemisphere would not have had occured because english is aggressive and french is not.
The romanians use to say : We speak english by necessity and french by love
A trilingular english Canadian
A lot? Not really–read the thread again. We shouldn’t conflate tone and intonation, and this statement:
seems to confuse volume with pitch. You can use tone (such as in Mandarin or Thai) to encode morphemes for semantic purposes without “raising your voice” (increasing volume). Intonation, on the other hand, is really about relative differences in pitch across the suprasegmental flow of an utterance–such as the way we can make questions in English without using grammar (syntax):
A: my brother’s a witch doctor
B: he is
Speaker B uses intonation either to agree, or to express surprise (with a rejoinder question), and he can do this either way equally effectively by shouting or by whispering.
Common phrases such as “tone of voice” also confuse this conversation, because they’re really indexing all kinds of socio-cultural and interactive dimensions to language, such that you will hear people say things like “I don’t like the tone of your email,” etc.
P.S.-- Yeah it’s a zombie thread, but don’t bother with the lame jokes, please.
That reminds me of the claim that we would not have wars if women ruled the world. Because Catherine the Great, Elizabeth I, and Joan of Arc brought in a reign of peace. Or for that matter, Napoleons I and III (alright, Corsicans, but still Romance), and Philip IV the Fair were pacifists. I know, exceptions don’t prove the rule, but in other words, cite?
And a good portion (I’ve heard over half) of the English language is of French or Romance origins. Are the English more peaceable than the [del]Germans[/del] Swedes?
Personal experience has a lot to do with it. I find French a very harsh and frightening language, because I’m often exposed to it in the streets and shops when I’m in Quebec, but I don’t comprehend it well at all. I would love to never hear French again.
German doesn’t bother me at all, I guess because I only ever encounter it on my own terms (like in German songs or films, some of which I quite enjoy), and there is no pressure for me to understand everything or formulate replies.
English was not my first language, but as I listened and learned I remember it giving me the impression that it was full of words and sounds that could hide aggressive intent. IMO English can shield a meaning, making it seem far less disagreeable or ominous then it actually is. And I kind of like that about English, as it can be very useful in communicating without wearing one’s heart on the sleeve.
All languages sound aggressive when spoken by zombies.
I think any language that has a word that means “defenestrate” must be pretty aggressive.