(L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

A forum for discussing linguistics or just languages in general.
User avatar
Ear of the Sphinx
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1969
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 01:41
Location: Nose of the Sun

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Ear of the Sphinx » 19 Aug 2016 16:03

Aleks wrote:Why is it that English has the /eɪ/ diphtong yet we have the /ɛ/ vowel and not /e/?
Matter of the analysis. You can analyze /ɛ eɪ/ as /ɛ ɛj/ if it makes more sense to you.
Thrice the brinded cat hath mew'd.

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 669
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 21 Aug 2016 02:28

Okay, here's a question I've been wondering about. What exactly is the feature that joins the "rhotics" together aside from the fact that they're written with the letter <r> in most languages? Are the "rhotics" really just "non-lateral liquids"? If so, the fact that sounds like the uvular trill and the alveolar tap are both in the same category seems a bit arbitrary.

To that effect I don't even know how I'd describe what exactly a "liquid" sound is, other than "it's R or L".

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11647
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by shimobaatar » 21 Aug 2016 03:14

KaiTheHomoSapien wrote:Okay, here's a question I've been wondering about. What exactly is the feature that joins the "rhotics" together aside from the fact that they're written with the letter <r> in most languages? Are the "rhotics" really just "non-lateral liquids"? If so, the fact that sounds like the uvular trill and the alveolar tap are both in the same category seems a bit arbitrary.

To that effect I don't even know how I'd describe what exactly a "liquid" sound is, other than "it's R or L".
This page has a lot of relevant information, I feel.

User avatar
KaiTheHomoSapien
greek
greek
Posts: 669
Joined: 15 Feb 2016 06:10
Location: Northern California

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by KaiTheHomoSapien » 21 Aug 2016 03:45

^Interesting. This I think is the most interesting part:

"The fact that the sounds conventionally classified as "rhotics" vary greatly in both place and manner in terms of articulation, and also in their acoustic characteristics, has led several linguists to investigate what, if anything, they have in common that justifies grouping them together. One suggestion that has been made is that each member of the class of rhotics shares certain properties with other members of the class, but not necessarily the same properties with all; in this case, rhotics have a "family resemblance" with each other rather than a strict set of shared properties. Another suggestion is that rhotics are defined by their behaviour on the sonority hierarchy, namely, that a rhotic is any sound that patterns as being more sonorous than a lateral consonant but less sonorous than a vowel. The potential for variation within the class of rhotics makes them a popular area for research in sociolinguistics."

User avatar
Aleks
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 91
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 01:37

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Aleks » 22 Aug 2016 19:51

So back to that /eɪ/ question I had earlier is /e:/ practically the same as /eɪ/?

User avatar
Dormouse559
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2816
Joined: 10 Nov 2012 20:52
Location: California

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Dormouse559 » 22 Aug 2016 20:26

No, not at all. One is a diphthong and the other is a long monophthong. They may sound similar to English speakers because they are realizations of the same phoneme in different dialects.

User avatar
Xonen
moderator
moderator
Posts: 1505
Joined: 16 May 2010 00:25

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Xonen » 22 Aug 2016 22:32

HoskhMatriarch wrote:
Xonen wrote:Then again, it tends to be more pleasant to listen to nails on chalkboard than to two lovers bill and coo in any language, so that's not saying much. [¬.¬] Of course, not understanding what they're saying might help.
Have you even heard romantic (not to be confused with Romantic although there is frequently overlap) poetry?
Both kinds; the one with the capital letter tends to be much better (and yes, that strikethrough is... warranted there). But anyway, back to linguistics here.

Aleks wrote:So back to that /eɪ/ question I had earlier is /e:/ practically the same as /eɪ/?
Well, they can be, sort of - but [e:] is not the same thing as [eɪ]! It's important to note the difference between phonemic and phonetic transcription here: /slashes/ and [brackets], respectively. The former is language-specific and somewhat arbitrary, while the latter aims for objective description of the actual sound.

In a language like English (or at least most dialects of it), where the difference between [e:] and [eɪ] doesn't distinguish words, it doesn't really matter which symbol you choose for the phoneme - but since [eɪ] is the most common realization in most (prestige) dialects, it makes sense to use the same symbol for the phoneme, hence /eɪ/. However, in a language where that difference does distinguish words, /e:/ and /eɪ/ would refer to clearly different phonemes, and not be at all interchangeable.

User avatar
OTʜᴇB
roman
roman
Posts: 960
Joined: 14 May 2016 11:59
Location: SW England

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by OTʜᴇB » 31 Aug 2016 23:10

IPA symbol for a kind of alveolar-postalveolar lateral plosive? I got to that sound by making the shape for /l/ but then extending my tongue out sideways to restrict airflow completely, then lowering the sides to make an airy pop. Like a plosive version of /ɬ/?
:con: : Current Project

BTW I use Arch

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4500
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Creyeditor » 01 Sep 2016 00:29

Maybe it's a click? Or an affricate?
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]

User avatar
OTʜᴇB
roman
roman
Posts: 960
Joined: 14 May 2016 11:59
Location: SW England

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by OTʜᴇB » 01 Sep 2016 00:52

Creyeditor wrote:Maybe it's a click? Or an affricate?
Possibly. Is there a diacritic that plosive-ises a sound?
:con: : Current Project

BTW I use Arch

User avatar
Creyeditor
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 4500
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Creyeditor » 01 Sep 2016 00:54

OTʜᴇB wrote:
Creyeditor wrote:Maybe it's a click? Or an affricate?
Possibly. Is there a diacritic that plosive-ises a sound?
Well, affricates are kind of plosive-ized fricatives ...
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]

User avatar
OTʜᴇB
roman
roman
Posts: 960
Joined: 14 May 2016 11:59
Location: SW England

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by OTʜᴇB » 01 Sep 2016 00:56

Creyeditor wrote:
OTʜᴇB wrote:
Creyeditor wrote:Maybe it's a click? Or an affricate?
Possibly. Is there a diacritic that plosive-ises a sound?
Well, affricates are kind of plosive-ized fricatives ...
So I guess it would be /tɬ/ then. Cheers.
:con: : Current Project

BTW I use Arch

User avatar
Aleks
cuneiform
cuneiform
Posts: 91
Joined: 20 Jun 2015 01:37

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Aleks » 01 Sep 2016 22:23

Is there some place where I can find the IPA of English words accurately? See because I'm getting conflicting results from different sources and some don't make sense. Dictionary.com has IPA for words but I am wondering why forest is [fɔrɪst]. Yet it doesn't sound like that when I hear clips of it. It sounds more like [foʊrɪst], is there a reason behind why there is an [ɔ]?

shimobaatar
korean
korean
Posts: 11647
Joined: 12 Jul 2013 23:09
Location: PA → IN

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by shimobaatar » 01 Sep 2016 22:56

Aleks wrote:Is there some place where I can find the IPA of English words accurately? See because I'm getting conflicting results from different sources and some don't make sense. Dictionary.com has IPA for words but I am wondering why forest is [fɔrɪst]. Yet it doesn't sound like that when I hear clips of it. It sounds more like [foʊrɪst], is there a reason behind why there is an [ɔ]?
I know that Wiktionary often has IPA transcriptions for English words usually in multiple dialects.

User avatar
GrandPiano
runic
runic
Posts: 2638
Joined: 11 Jan 2015 23:22
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by GrandPiano » 02 Sep 2016 00:13

Aleks wrote:Is there some place where I can find the IPA of English words accurately? See because I'm getting conflicting results from different sources and some don't make sense. Dictionary.com has IPA for words but I am wondering why forest is [fɔrɪst]. Yet it doesn't sound like that when I hear clips of it. It sounds more like [foʊrɪst], is there a reason behind why there is an [ɔ]?
Many people (myself included) do pronounce it [ˈfɔɹɪst], and I'm pretty sure that's actually the most common pronunciation. However, I'm sure there are also plenty of people that pronounce it [ˈfoʊɹɪst]. Can you link to the clips you've listened to?
:eng: - Native
:chn: - B2
:esp: - A2
:jpn: - A2

Sumelic
greek
greek
Posts: 619
Joined: 18 Jun 2013 23:01

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by Sumelic » 02 Sep 2016 20:32

Aleks wrote:Is there some place where I can find the IPA of English words accurately? See because I'm getting conflicting results from different sources and some don't make sense. Dictionary.com has IPA for words but I am wondering why forest is [fɔrɪst]. Yet it doesn't sound like that when I hear clips of it. It sounds more like [foʊrɪst], is there a reason behind why there is an [ɔ]?
[ɔ] is not a very precise transcription. For most Americans, there is no phonemic contrast between tautosyllabic /ɔr/ and /oʊr/. So the vowel can be transcribed with [ɔ], even though for many people it's higher than the vowel of "thought" (which, even for people without the cot-caught merger, is generally not the same as the vowel used in British "thought," even though both are usually transcribed [ɔ]).

Relevant post from John Wells's phonetics blog: http://phonetic-blog.blogspot.com/2010/ ... hucks.html

Dictionaries give generalized, phonemic transcriptions because they're meant to serve a wide audience of people who will have a variety of accents. If you want narrow transcriptions, you'll need to look at sources that focus on specific accents/dialects.

User avatar
OTʜᴇB
roman
roman
Posts: 960
Joined: 14 May 2016 11:59
Location: SW England

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by OTʜᴇB » 03 Sep 2016 23:42

Is "rhoticity" the kind of "r"-ness on vowels? So would /o˞/ be like "or"?
:con: : Current Project

BTW I use Arch

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1869
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by loglorn » 04 Sep 2016 00:06

OTʜᴇB wrote:Is "rhoticity" the kind of "r"-ness on vowels? So would /o˞/ be like "or"?
Rhoticity is to /r/ as palatalization is to /j/. Not the same thing, but most clearly related.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

User avatar
GrandPiano
runic
runic
Posts: 2638
Joined: 11 Jan 2015 23:22
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by GrandPiano » 04 Sep 2016 02:05

loglorn wrote:
OTʜᴇB wrote:Is "rhoticity" the kind of "r"-ness on vowels? So would /o˞/ be like "or"?
Rhoticity is to /r/ as palatalization is to /j/. Not the same thing, but most clearly related.
Or more accurately [ɹ], not [r].
:eng: - Native
:chn: - B2
:esp: - A2
:jpn: - A2

User avatar
loglorn
mayan
mayan
Posts: 1869
Joined: 17 Mar 2014 03:22

Re: (L&N) Q&A Thread - Quick questions go here

Post by loglorn » 04 Sep 2016 02:26

GrandPiano wrote:
loglorn wrote:
OTʜᴇB wrote:Is "rhoticity" the kind of "r"-ness on vowels? So would /o˞/ be like "or"?
Rhoticity is to /r/ as palatalization is to /j/. Not the same thing, but most clearly related.
Or more accurately [ɹ], not [r].
Yes, yes, of course. I'm on my phone.
Diachronic Conlanging is the path to happiness, given time. [;)]

Gigxkpoyan Languages: CHÍFJAEŚÍ RETLA TLAPTHUV DÄLDLEN CJUŚËKNJU ṢATT

Other langs: Søsøzatli Kamëzet

Post Reply