8

These are (mostly) consonant clusters and not reasonably analysed as single phonemes in English For people who distinguish wh from w though, this is still a single consonant, /ʍ/ not a cluster /hw/. I.e. it is the voiceless counterpart of the usual labiovelar approximant /w/, not a sequence of /h/ and /w/ Double articulations would usually refer to phonemes ...


7

Having acoustically inspected these tokens as well as online tokens from Esling and Ladefoged, I notice that all performers have a longer voice onset time (around 20 msc, varying according to performer and context, greater in the [aCa] context) in production of [c], and it is filled with identifiable fricative-like noise. The best source is the Esling chart (...


6

I think you might be conflating phonetic and phonemic voicing. If you are really talking about phonetic voicing, the answer is that it is quite common to find affricates that are only partially voiced. As @jlawler points out, the phoneme /dʒ/ in English is considered phonologically voiced, and it contrasts with /tʃ/. But phonetically, what is broadly ...


5

As the help page explains, the combinations of symbols you mentioned represent Wikipedia's own diaphonemes, not single phonemes or phones. They are listed separately because, in that particular system, e.g. /sj/ represents a unit that can be /sj/ (/s/ + /j/), /s/, or /ʃ/ depending on variety.


5

One reason why these are considered by some to be single segments is that they simplify to [w l n ...] in some dialects. There are sub-trends in phonology which treat consonant plus glide sequences as rounded or palatalized consonants. I am not persuaded by those claims, but that's not the question. If we assume that these are single segments, then the best ...


3

The fundamental (and contrastive) difference between phonologically aspirated stops and phonological affricates is the nature of the release. Aspiration is turbulent noise whose source is the glottis, thus aspiration has formant structure similar to the following sonorant, and a resulting low COG, and diffuse spectrum. Frication noise has its source in the ...


3

The affricate /tʃ/ does not behave differently from the stops /p t k/ w.r.t. aspiration. The relevant contexts for aspiration are bit more complicated and are best stated in terms of foot-initial (aspirated) vs. foot-non-initial positions, with some provision for C#ˈV contexts where there is no aspiration ("watch Oscar; set Oscar; stop Oscar"). In final ...


3

Shorter answer: as many as any other single consonant. Coda consonants aren't necessarily moraic – in some languages they are, in some they are not. Affricates are usually single consonants with a particular kind of release (not everything written "ts, tʃ" is an affricate, sometimes they are sequences. "Affricates" are single sounds, not sequences of sounds)....


3

Short answer: one (probably). Longer answer: The definition of "morae" tends to depend on the specifics of the language and your analysis. They're not something we can necessarily measure quantitatively—instead, they're theoretical constructs used to make an analysis look nicer. (Sometimes morae do map cleanly to measurable units of time, other times they ...


2

The short answer is that there is no difference. Phonetically speaking, an affricate is just a stop closure followed by a period of frication, so [t] plus frication is the same as an affricate. The distinction between an affricate and a stop-fricative sequence is really a phonological one, where the former behaves as a single phoneme and the latter behaves ...


2

Partial answer: As commenters and other answers have mentioned, morpheme boundaries may be important to the syllabification of a word. Wells's rules are not meant to apply to all words: the existence of exceptions is made clear in the Introduction (which refers to "competing pronunciations that differ only in syllabification" and "morpheme boundaries ... ...


2

You can search for the segment [tʃʰ] at Phoible and get quite an impressive list of languages having it. Clicking on Mundari as a randomly chosen example confirms that it contrasts with non-aspirated [tʃ] in that language.


1

Sanskrit, and most other Indian languages, have (at least in the script) a four-way distinction of c - ch - j - jh. I would have to rummage a bit in the dictionary to establish minimal pairs.


1

(Disclaimer: ..surely have read John C. Wells’s article “Syllabification and allophony... no to both of the things, i am a high school student interested in linguistics) 1) since you labelled this question as phonotactics, each language has its own phonotactics, thus making some syllables feasible and pronouncable and "seamless" in that particular language ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible