New answers tagged

4

The variability of nasalization in such sequences is "well known" (in Greek linguistic circles). This article investigates the question instrumentally, in Thessalonikan and Cretan dialects. The conclusion to be drawn from this study is "yes, no, and all points in between", w.r.t. the question of whether there is prenasalization, that is, ...


3

This isn't specific to γγ, it is a general phenomenon of modern Greek pronunciation of voiced plosives, which are also spelled μπ ντ γκ. I don't have first-hand experience, but according to linguistic sources I've read, Greek has two series of plosives: voiceless and voiced. A plosive from the voiced series has no prenasalization when utterance-initial or ...


2

The tradition of naming phonetic properties has favored using anatomically-based terminology, so if you read linguistic works of the 19th century you will find exclusive use of words like "labialized", "palatalized", "gutturalized": emphasizing the thing that creates the result, and not what the result looks like. I don't know ...


1

In Middle English it was /u/ — en.wiktionary.org/wiki/comen#Middle_English. The letter o is written there for practical reasons: near m, n, w, v made up of vertical strokes the letter u also made up of vertical strokes is hard to discern, many vertical strokes in a row are ambiguous when hand-written. And, irrespective of its spelling, ME /u/ > ModE /ʌ/, ...


5

In many dialects of Pashto, xʷ only occurs in clusters. It only occurs in clusters (mostly before [r ~ ɾ] and [l]). It never occurs alone and contrasts with x (and xw in some words) for example /xre/ means “(you're a) female donkey” and /xʷre/ [with rising intonation] means “(are you) eating?”. Some other examples and minimal pairs are: [xʷrɐm] “(I am) ...


Top 50 recent answers are included