Hot answers tagged

9

The short answer is yes--schwa before a nasal in the same syllable tends to be nasalized. The more nuanced answer is that nasalization in English is not really as straightforward as is sometimes taught in Intro to Linguistics classes. There are a couple of issues to bear in mind: Perhaps precisely because nasalization is not contrastive in English, there ...


7

Nasal fricatives are seriously rare or nonexistent; this dissertation looks at the essentially aerodynamic problem of producing fricative noise and nasalization simultaneously (fricatives require high airflow with major impedance; nasalization provides a no-resistance escape route for air, so thwarts pressure buildup). Nasal vowels on the other hand are not ...


6

There is a terminological distinction made between “a nasal” like [m n ŋ], and “a nasalized sound” which has a tilde over it (ã,r̃). Your question seems to be more about nasalized sounds. A nasalized vowel is said to be one with air flowing through the nasal passages during its production. (This is true enough for normal understanding, but not literally true:...


5

It's all about the manner of articulation. A stop consonant is by definition a sound produced by the complete obstruction of airflow though the mouth, at least for a short time. There are two kinds, oral stops (what you call "stops"), which keep the velum raised, preventing airflow from escaping though the nose, and nasal stops (what you call "nasals"), ...


4

The answer can be either yes or no—it comes down to your definition. Some people define "stop consonants" to be consonants where the airflow is completely stopped (as in, the opposite of continuant consonants). In this case, nasals are not stops: the airflow continues through the nose, which is why you can extend them and keep the sound going. Other people ...


4

This may be a useful overview, also this (ultimately, Johnson “Acoustic and Auditory Phonetics” chapter 9, not online). Nasals have anti-formants at 1100 Hz and 3300 Hz, laterals at 2100 Hz, and the anti-formant of laterals is not as strong (the nasal passage is much larger so absorbs more sound energy). The formants are not as close together for laterals as ...


3

Plugged nasals still involve the nasopharynx, even if air does not flow through the nares. The term "nasal" refers to a class of normal speech sounds where air does indeed flow through the nostrils, and doesn't refer to sounds produced by putting a cork in your nose. Our terminology is based on facts of normal speech. Languages simply don't use plugged-nose "...


3

I suggest recording and measuring your measurements (but be careful to not totally believe the numbers). I found that in all cases including [n] vs. [nʷ], there was some difference in formants, though hearing it in [n] vs. [nʷ] was very hard. The acoustic differences are subtle and hard to characterize except with [ɴ] vs. [ɴʷ] which is quite clear. ...


3

Anunāsika is the Sanskrit name for what linguists call vowel nasalization. A vowel marked with a chandrabindu is pronounced with the soft palate lowered, allowing air to escape through your nose. It's difficult to describe nasalization in text, but it's characteristic of French: in standard Parisian French, a vowel followed by a (silent) n or m will be ...


2

In a word, no. There are more organs involved in speech production than the ones you list. Bear in mind that "the throat" is not a single organ, but a set of organs and cavities. The ones involved in speech production include the true vocal folds, which are part of the larynx, which lies below the pharynx. The true folds phonate when they are brought ...


2

Nasals You may be able to approximate a nasal sound with closed nostrils, but if you pinch your nose shut and try to pronounce a nasal sound you will find you cannot do it. You can feel the air building up behind where you have pinched it shut. Also, the nasal cavity acts as a secondary resonator. It is involved in producing nasal vowels from e.g. French ...


2

The question has is a presupposition which may be false, depending on dialect, namely that there actually is a schwa before a tautosyllabic nasal. An alternative narrow transcription of "restriction" is [ɹʷəˈstɹʷɪkʃn̩], with a syllabic n. There is one trend of transcribing <ər, əl, ən, əm>, and a competing trend of transcribing those as <ɹ̩, l̩, m̩, n̩>...


2

This being an obligatory answer to a question, we would have to know your instructor's ideology and instructional point – i.e. in the present instance, we can only offer reasonable interpretations of what he/she might have had in mind, based on what is actually said and done in linguistics. The phonetic term "plosive" unambiguously refers to [p,t,k] and not ...


2

One of the canonical examples of "floating non-tonal feature" is [constricted pharynx] in the article "Emphasis harmony in a Modern Aramaic dialect" (Language 1984: 1-26). There are various analyses of non-tonal phenomena which make the assumption that those feature are "floating", but are equally amenable to a segmental treatment where a specific segment ...


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 ...


2

Standard IPA certainly would use a tilde over the vowel instead. But use of superscript "n" for nasalisation is often seen, e.g. in the most common systematic romanisation of Xiamen and Taiwanese Hokkien Chinese, pe̍h-ōe-jī. What semi-nasalisation means in this case has to be put into context with "full" nasalisation in standard French pronunciation. ...


2

As I understand your excerpt, they are talking about nasalization. Nasalization is transcribed with this symbol (upper tilde): ẽ. You can add parenthesis to indicate that it is a partially nasalized vowel: ⁽ẽ⁾ (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensions_to_the_International_Phonetic_Alphabet)


2

The term "tenuis" in linguistics is not an absolute phonetic description, it is a relative term, similar to "unmarked". The consonant b is voiced, the consonant p is not. When describing an instance of p as being tenuis (or not), that presupposed that you are talking about kinds of p, in which case you might be dealing with [pʰ], [p'] or [p]. "Tenuis" simply ...


2

Tenuis is a term used to refer to voiceless plosives [p, t, k], especially ones that are unaspirated, so it doesn't apply to [m], which is by definition voiced. Burmese has voiceless [m̥], but not aspirated [mʰ]. Burmese /m̥/ is typically partially voiced [m̥͡m] according to Watkins (2001), so that realization can be considered as having a negative VOT.


2

This paper by Cardona surveys the problem of determining the status of anunāsika versus anusvāra (I don't derive any firm conclusions from this, but it does lay out the textual facts). Pāṇini is said to have believed that the terms refer to different phonetic things, and Whitney thinks the difference is terminological / theoretical without basis in ...


1

I understand the standard way of pronouncing n sound is to put my tongue behind the top teeth ... Although IPA [n] may refer to a dental sound (where the tongue forms a seal with the back of the top teeth), it may also refer to an alveolar sound. In this situation the tongue makes a seal with the alveolar ridge, the little shelf formed by the gum behind the ...


1

The standard way of pronouncing the sound [n] is, in part and approximately, to put your tongue behind the top teeth. When you say the English word "language", you are producing the sound [ŋ] and not [n]. The letter "n" in English spelling is pronounced in many different ways. Letters are written symbols used to represent sounds of ...


1

It's probably related to the nasal consonant /m/ at the end of the word. /xānom/ is the formal form of the word, which is spelled خانُم (though normally without the diacritic). /xānum/, is the informal form, and is written as خانوم. other examples: باران بارون مهربان مهربون آسمان آسمون نادان نادون ناودان ناودون کاروان کاروون باغبان باغبون گلدان گلدون ...


1

It's a glottalized p, usually written [p']. But sometimes this term refers to ejective glottalization, with both closure and raising of the glottis, and of course in English we don't get raising of the glottis. So it's not an ejective. As noted in some other answers, [sʌ̃ʔm̩] is a possible pronunciation of "something" for many of us. That's what you get ...


1

You are presumably hearing it right. "Something" is different from "rotten" in more than place of articulation: "rotten" = [rɑʔn̩]. "Something", in that pronunciation, is [sʌmʔm̩] (traditionally that vowel is transcribed with wedge unless it's in an unstressed syllable). Syllabicity is not a phonetic "fact" that can be decided by listening, so I included the ...


1

After thinking about what you described, I was thinking and I think I realised you were probably referring to the colloquial shortening of the word that is indeed glottalised. I believe this sequence of sounds is best transcribed as some variant of [səʔm] with a pre-glottalised nasal.


1

There are different kinds of stop consonant /b/. Prevoiced /b/: this occurs in Spanish, French, Russian, etc; has a negative VOT. In other words, voicing starts before the closure. You can call it 'voice lagging time'. Partially voiced /b/: this occurs in aspirating languages, and intially. has non-negative VOT (sure, you find some speakers with negative ...


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