Sj-sound Discussion

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Sj-sound Discussion

Post by Xing » 10 Jun 2012 09:16

Esmelthien wrote:[ɧ].
I hate that symbol.

Modicone: Split from the [Game] Collective conlanging thread.

Esmelthien
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 150
Joined: 28 Apr 2012 23:23

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Esmelthien » 10 Jun 2012 11:24

Xing wrote:
Esmelthien wrote:[ɧ].
I hate that symbol.
Fine, [ʃ͡x], then. Should I change it?

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 10 Jun 2012 12:35

Esmelthien wrote:
Fine, [ʃ͡x], then. Should I change it?
I'm not sure whether that sound is even possible to make, or what it would sound like.

If it's the sound found in some Scandinavian varieties sometimes transcribed with that symbol, it's really [xʷ] or [ʍ].

Esmelthien
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 150
Joined: 28 Apr 2012 23:23

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Esmelthien » 10 Jun 2012 12:51

Xing wrote:I'm not sure whether that sound is even possible to make, or what it would sound like.

If it's the sound found in some Scandinavian varieties sometimes transcribed with that symbol, it's really [xʷ] or [ʍ].
Officially, [ɧ] is a coarticulation of [ʃ] and [x], so therefore [ʃ͡x].

User avatar
Ànradh
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2100
Joined: 28 Jul 2011 02:57
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Ànradh » 11 Jun 2012 05:49

Xing wrote:I'm not sure whether that sound is even possible to make, or what it would sound like.

If it's the sound found in some Scandinavian varieties sometimes transcribed with that symbol, it's really [xʷ] or [ʍ].
It is possible, though it sounds nothing like [xʷ] or [ʍ].
Sin ar Pàrras agus nì sinne mar a thogras sinn. Choisinn sinn e agus ’s urrainn dhuinn ga loisgeadh.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 11 Jun 2012 07:56

Lodhas wrote:
Xing wrote:I'm not sure whether that sound is even possible to make, or what it would sound like.

If it's the sound found in some Scandinavian varieties sometimes transcribed with that symbol, it's really [xʷ] or [ʍ].
It is possible, though it sounds nothing like [xʷ] or [ʍ].
Is it attested?

User avatar
Ànradh
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2100
Joined: 28 Jul 2011 02:57
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Ànradh » 11 Jun 2012 20:17

Xing wrote:Is it attested?
No idea; my only claim is that it's possible to produce (without difficulty, in my case).
Sin ar Pàrras agus nì sinne mar a thogras sinn. Choisinn sinn e agus ’s urrainn dhuinn ga loisgeadh.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 11 Jun 2012 20:29

Lodhas wrote:
Xing wrote:Is it attested?
No idea; my only claim is that it's possible to produce (without difficulty, in my case).
Are you sure it's a truly doubly-articulated fricative? (And not merely one with a secondary articulation)?

Esmelthien
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 150
Joined: 28 Apr 2012 23:23

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Esmelthien » 11 Jun 2012 20:59

Xing wrote:Are you sure it's a truly doubly-articulated fricative? (And not merely one with a secondary articulation)?
"The International Phonetic Association describes [ɧ] as 'simultaneous [ʃ] and [x],' but this claim is disputed among phoneticians, including at least one former president of the IPA. Other descriptive labels include voiceless palatal-velar fricative, voiceless dorso-palatal velar fricative, voiceless postalveolar and velar fricative, or voiceless coarticulated velar and palatoalveolar fricative."

It's a manner of debate, but it seems to be the most commonly accepted definition.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 11 Jun 2012 21:56

Esmelthien wrote:
Xing wrote:Are you sure it's a truly doubly-articulated fricative? (And not merely one with a secondary articulation)?
"The International Phonetic Association describes [ɧ] as 'simultaneous [ʃ] and [x],' but this claim is disputed among phoneticians, including at least one former president of the IPA. Other descriptive labels include voiceless palatal-velar fricative, voiceless dorso-palatal velar fricative, voiceless postalveolar and velar fricative, or voiceless coarticulated velar and palatoalveolar fricative."

It's a manner of debate, but it seems to be the most commonly accepted definition.
One can define things as one likes, but does the definition describe any sound that actually exists?

User avatar
Ànradh
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2100
Joined: 28 Jul 2011 02:57
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Ànradh » 12 Jun 2012 19:28

Xing wrote:Are you sure it's a truly doubly-articulated fricative? (And not merely one with a secondary articulation)?
It must be said that I don't understand the difference. Both describe sounds produced with two articulations, do they not?
Sin ar Pàrras agus nì sinne mar a thogras sinn. Choisinn sinn e agus ’s urrainn dhuinn ga loisgeadh.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 12 Jun 2012 20:06

Lodhas wrote: It must be said that I don't understand the difference. Both describe sounds produced with two articulations, do they not?
A doubly-aarticulated consonant has two main points of articulations (with equal constriction). A doubly-articulated stop, like k͡p, has a closure at two points, the velum and the lips.

A consonant with secondary-articulation has one main point of articulation, and another secondary point of articulation. Like tʷ or kʲ or pˠ - they have a full closure only at one POA, and a minor, more approximant-like closure at another POA.
Last edited by Xing on 12 Jun 2012 21:22, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ànradh
mayan
mayan
Posts: 2100
Joined: 28 Jul 2011 02:57
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Ànradh » 12 Jun 2012 20:48

Xing wrote:A doubly-aarticulated consonant has two main points of articulations (with equal constriction). A doubly-articulated stop, like k͡p, has a closure at two points, the velum and the lips.

A consonant with secondary-articulation has one main point of articulation, and another secondary point of articulation. Like tʷ or kʲ or pˠ - they have a full closure only at one POA, and a minor, more aproximant-like closure at another POA.
In that case, I'm fairly certain it's doubly articulated... Perhaps it's best to assume I'm wrong for now. :P
Sin ar Pàrras agus nì sinne mar a thogras sinn. Choisinn sinn e agus ’s urrainn dhuinn ga loisgeadh.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 13 Jun 2012 23:24

The distinction between <aa> and <a>, <oo> and <o>, <ì> and <i>, <è> and <e>, and between <ù> and <u> is often ignored in informal writing - people just write <a o i e u>.

Dremel Windborne
rupestrian
rupestrian
Posts: 8
Joined: 12 Mar 2012 03:08

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Dremel Windborne » 21 Jun 2012 14:45

Xing wrote:One can define things as one likes, but does the definition describe any sound that actually exists?
Yeah, it's commonly known as the "sj-sound" from Swedish, although it has different spellings as well. I don't know any case of the IPA designating a symbol for un-attested sounds.

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: [Game] Collective conlanging

Post by Xing » 21 Jun 2012 15:16

Dremel Windborne wrote:
Xing wrote:One can define things as one likes, but does the definition describe any sound that actually exists?
Yeah, it's commonly known as the "sj-sound" from Swedish, although it has different spellings as well. I don't know any case of the IPA designating a symbol for un-attested sounds.
Where is it attested?
Wikipaedia wrote:Several claims have been made for doubly articulated fricatives or affricates, most notoriously a Swedish phoneme which has its own IPA symbol, [ɧ]. However, laboratory measurements have never succeeded in demonstrating simultaneous frication at two points of articulation, and such sounds turn out to be either secondary articulation, or a sequence of two non-simultaneous fricatives.

Nortaneous
greek
greek
Posts: 631
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 12:28

Re: Sj-sound Discussion

Post by Nortaneous » 24 Jun 2012 12:10

ɧ is the sje-sound. Nobody's sure what the sje-sound is, hence the wild guessing on the part of the IPA. It helps that it supposedly varies wildly according to dialect, and even individual speaker. I've heard it described as the voiceless version of English r, and also as just [x_w]. (To me it sounds like a labiodentalized velar fricative.)

User avatar
Ceresz
runic
runic
Posts: 2680
Joined: 16 Oct 2010 01:14
Location: North
Contact:

Re: Sj-sound Discussion

Post by Ceresz » 24 Jun 2012 12:19

I pretty much use /ɧ/ like I use /r/ when describing Swedish. Their exact realizations vary between different variants of Swedish. I would describe my own realization as something close to [xʷ]. I've read that the realization in southern Sweden is far more labial than velar, being closer to [ʍ]. I have also seen [fˠʷ] as a realization, which kinda makes sense. Hopefully when I get better at reading/analyzing spectrograms I can more properly transcribe my realization of /ɧ/.

Here's an image from The Sounds of the World's Languages:
Image

User avatar
Visinoid
roman
roman
Posts: 1038
Joined: 04 Aug 2011 04:13
Location: Sparta

Re: Sj-sound Discussion

Post by Visinoid » 28 Jun 2012 03:32

When you look at the spectrogram, /ɧ/ is clearly closer to /ʃ/ and /ʃʷ/. :3

I made a completely amateurish analysis :D

Image

User avatar
Xing
MVP
MVP
Posts: 5311
Joined: 22 Aug 2010 17:46

Re: Sj-sound Discussion

Post by Xing » 28 Jun 2012 22:07

I'd like to get rid of the ɧ-symbol just to de-mystify the sj-sound. For broad, phonetic transcriptions, one could use /x/, /xʷ/ or /ʍ/. Further diacritics could be used for more detailed, phonetic transcriptions.

Post Reply