Hot answers tagged

24

Your basic premise is incorrect here: /w/ is listed in the Consonant section of the IPA page on Wikipedia, under Co-articulated consonants where it belongs. It doesn’t belong in the main table, because the main table orders consonants by place of articulation, and /w/ (like all co-articulated consonants) has multiple places of articulation: bilabial and ...


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 ...


8

It's also a widely-held axiom in linguistics (phonology, specifically) that segments are always syllabified, in all languages. But that is not an empirically well-supported claim. There are certainly a number of languages which provide various kinds of evidence that the syllable can be a thing, just as [ʕ] can be a segment of a language, but not every ...


7

Wikipedia says "/ð/ – the so-called 'soft d' (Danish: blødt d) – is a velarized laminal alveolar approximant [ð̠˕ˠ]", citing Basbøll (2005), Grønnum (2003), and Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996).


7

Since you tagged this "phonology" rather than "phonetics": There are a few different ways of representing the second syllable of words like "mirror" in rhotic dialects. Some people treat it as a combination of a vowel /ə/ and a consonant; other people treat it as a syllabic resonant /ɹ̩/. (The same goes for the second syllable ...


6

Short answer: yes, it generally means the same consonant twice, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's a gap in between them. If you're a native English-speaker, think about how you'd say "acting" or "lapdog" in normal conversation. For me, unless I'm deliberately trying to enunciate, there won't be any release between the two stops. ...


6

It's a widely-held axiom in linguistics that syllabification is never phonemic. In other words, words aren't stored in your brain pre-broken-down into syllables; that syllabification happens later according to regular rules. The reasoning behind this axiom is a bit circular, since it sometimes requires you to finagle your underlying phonemic forms to encode ...


5

Co-editor of PHOIBLE here. In the feature system used in PHOIBLE, a is considered to have features -front and -back — i.e., a (low) central vowel, not a (low) front vowel. Therefore you would think that a̟ should be considered as a low front vowel (as your instincts suggested). However, that featural specification is already in use for æ. This illustrates ...


5

"Exact differences" only exist between languages, and you absolutely cannot rely on a person's writing system as a resolution of how things are pronounced. First, most linguistic material is not created by highly-trained ear phoneticians with classical Edinburgh-type knowledge of IPA letters. Second, even looking at material created by such ...


5

The layout of an IPA chart is partly arbitrary, by which I mean that there are patterns to it, but those patterns aren't necessary the only patterns that would have been reasonable. They just are what they are. I don't think you'll learn much about linguistics itself (as opposed to the history of linguistics) from trying to study them. The official chart has ...


5

The chart of the symbols in he IPA is given here: as you can see, there is no diacritic indicating "oral release". In the case of a language like Kaingang with complex oral+nasal contouring (see Wetzels & Nevins, Language 2018 vol 4), superscript oral and nasal letters are positioned appropriately so that one could write an orally-released m as ...


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 ...


5

Typically linguists use such diacritics when the sound they're describing is in between the sounds associated with unmodified base glyphs of the IPA. So I would not expect the author to write [ë̞] to represent the same sound as [ə], but rather a sound intermediate between [e] and [ə]


5

In Pashto (Indo-Iranian), the word for ‘blind’ does begin with /ɽ/ and is also written with ‘ڑ’ in some scripts, though most widely accepted scripts use ړ. blind: [ɽʉ̃n] (it's also pronounced with [ɻ])


4

If you look at official IPA charts (here, here), you won't find the letter /ɚ/ anymore. Esling's chart (the second of those) exemplifies the rhoticity diacritic on regular schwa (ə plus rhotic-hook, i.e. [ ə˞ ], analogous to [a˞] and so on. All that means is, "whatever the vowel is, plus a rhotic quality", which can be any kind of rhotic ...


3

If you saw it on PHOIBLE, it means the sound is a non-sibilant fricative. See here for documentation.


3

Based on Laver (1999), this page infers that doubling the under-bar diacritic ("retracted") can be used to mean "very retracted". It it true that the double-bar appears on pp. 559-560 of Laver, but there is no exegesis, it's simply there in some examples. This is not officially sanctioned IPA practice. Phoible claims the existence of [ʐ͇] ...


3

I have known a few languages other than Polish throughout my lifetime, which include Russian, English, French, Greek, and Hebrew, but in none of them have I observed any consistent difference between male and female speakers. The differences are almost surely there. They may be subtle, or quite variable because they interact with other sociolinguistic ...


3

I found this: http://ipa-reader.xyz Multiple accents are offered. At least on my phone I note that mini IPA symbols are not displayed at all. But they work: they are pronounced even though they are not visible on the screen after being pasted in.


3

This gets in to the difference between phonetic and phonological descriptions The phoneme in question is generally called /ð/. The issue is that the precise phonetic details of how this phoneme is produced, differ quite a lot from prototypical [ð] (which is why English-speakers generally hear it as closer to our /l/ than our /ð/) As Nardog says in their ...


3

IPA doesn't use the macron below ◌̱. The minus sign below ◌̠ looks basically the same and can be used to indicate a retracted articulation; but this is not necessary in English dictionaries. That means the phonetic transcription of your dictionary or website is probably not IPA. You will find a description of its symbols or ‘phonetic key’ in the introduction,...


3

This is impossible in principle, at least in the form that you asked. A modified version of the task might be possible. The main reason is that the input would be an acoustic waveform, which needs to be parsed into discrete segmental chunks, then labeled according to a standard. The letters and articulatory descriptions are standardized and easily accessible,...


3

I agree with @drammock and would add this. IPA is really a phonetically-based system of phonological symbolization. When a person write a certain sound of a language as [ɪ] or [e], that is in part a statement about what the vowel sounds like, where [ɪ] or [e] represent approximate targets. There is substantial variation in the formants of [ɪ] or [e] across ...


3

Augmenting @JoyfulSadness's answer, assuming ړ as the corresponding Pashto phoneme for Urdu's ڑ, here are couple of Pashto words: ړومبی (dialectal form of لومړی), and ړوند. In Sindhi & Shina Abjad, it is written as ڙ. Example: ڙک Also Malayalam Abjad seems to have a phoneme for that (ڔ). Example: ڔاگی (ṟāgi, meaning finger millet) Punjabi Shahmukhi also ...


3

You don't "break down" words into phonemes, you first transcribe a spoken word into a language-neutral alphabet which represents how the word is actually pronounced, and then you analyze the transcriptions according to some principles of phonemic analysis to decide what phonemes are present. The first task is extremely difficult (requires extensive ...


2

From a diachronic perspective, this is simply retraction vs advancement. The place of articulation appears as the most "important" part of such a series, and so that's how the phenomenon is portrayed. One commonly cited dramatic example is Spanish, e.g. Latin DIXIT becoming modern Castilian Spanish dijo /'dixo/. In this case, the consonant cluster ...


2

It isn't clearly established whether there are any phonetic categories of sounds, and it's possible that what exists in the phonetic component is all continua (that is certainly the case with physical realization, which is the other way that people think about "phonetics"). The term "front" is a phonological categories, with a ...


2

"Unvoiced uvular nasal" refers to a particular kind of language sound, just as "unvoiced bilabial fricative" (=[φ]) does. The physical action of articulating [φ] is similar to how you blow out a candle, but when you blow out a candle, you don't produce [φ] (for one, you don't blow when you speak, but youu do for a candle-blowing-action). ...


2

There is no phonetic difference, but there is also no phonetic unity supposed ᵐb / mb are pronounced in many different ways across languages. On occasion, there is an audible contrast between two such things, which is usually based on some durational facts, with the nasal being of different durations. Swahili and Sinhalese are examples of languages with two ...


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