Editing Talk:Voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative
Appearance
This is a talk page. Please respect the talk page guidelines. |
Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted. Encyclopedic content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 287: | Line 287: | ||
{{ping|YourAverageMax}} {{angbr|ɕ}} stands for any voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative. It can be labialized, aspirated, long, short or partially voiced at the end or at the beginning. It may be weakly fricated or strongly fricated. The fact that {{IPA|[ɕ]}} in the traditional RP pronunciation of ''tuesday'' doesn't fit your idea of how {{IPA|[ɕ]}} sounds like (or ''should'' sound like, which is even worse [no offense]) doesn't mean that the sound is not correctly described as a voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative. It's probably more weakly fricated than, say, Polish or Dutch {{IPA|[ɕ]}} and probably has some voicing at the end. In the German tradition, it'd probably be transcribed {{IPA|[ˈtʑ̥uːzdeɪ]}}, with {{angbr IPA|ʑ̥}} denoting a voiceless [[Fortis and lenis|lenis]] fricative. But how can it really be lenis if it is the only alveolo-palatal fricative in the dialect? For a consonant to be lenis, there has to be a fortis (fully voiceless and more strongly fricated) counterpart, no? Phonologically, it is an approximant that is phonetically devoiced and raised (=turned into a fricative) by the preceding fortis/voiceless alveolar stop. Plus, {{angbr IPA|ʑ̥}} is not an official way to transcribe a lenis {{IPA|[ɕ]}} (rather, it's just a way of transcribing a {{IPA|[ʑ]}} without a full voicing, which may or may not be synonymous with the canonical IPA value of the symbol {{angbr IPA|ɕ}}, which denotes a fully voiceless fricative). A more standard way of transcribing that is probably {{IPA|[ˈtɕ̞uːzdeɪ]}} (with the lowering diacritic, indicating a decreased amount of friction in comparison with the canonical IPA value of the symbol {{angbr IPA|ɕ}}). But again, none of that is in the source. [[User:Sol505000|Sol505000]] ([[User talk:Sol505000|talk]]) 22:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC) |
{{ping|YourAverageMax}} {{angbr|ɕ}} stands for any voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative. It can be labialized, aspirated, long, short or partially voiced at the end or at the beginning. It may be weakly fricated or strongly fricated. The fact that {{IPA|[ɕ]}} in the traditional RP pronunciation of ''tuesday'' doesn't fit your idea of how {{IPA|[ɕ]}} sounds like (or ''should'' sound like, which is even worse [no offense]) doesn't mean that the sound is not correctly described as a voiceless alveolo-palatal fricative. It's probably more weakly fricated than, say, Polish or Dutch {{IPA|[ɕ]}} and probably has some voicing at the end. In the German tradition, it'd probably be transcribed {{IPA|[ˈtʑ̥uːzdeɪ]}}, with {{angbr IPA|ʑ̥}} denoting a voiceless [[Fortis and lenis|lenis]] fricative. But how can it really be lenis if it is the only alveolo-palatal fricative in the dialect? For a consonant to be lenis, there has to be a fortis (fully voiceless and more strongly fricated) counterpart, no? Phonologically, it is an approximant that is phonetically devoiced and raised (=turned into a fricative) by the preceding fortis/voiceless alveolar stop. Plus, {{angbr IPA|ʑ̥}} is not an official way to transcribe a lenis {{IPA|[ɕ]}} (rather, it's just a way of transcribing a {{IPA|[ʑ]}} without a full voicing, which may or may not be synonymous with the canonical IPA value of the symbol {{angbr IPA|ɕ}}, which denotes a fully voiceless fricative). A more standard way of transcribing that is probably {{IPA|[ˈtɕ̞uːzdeɪ]}} (with the lowering diacritic, indicating a decreased amount of friction in comparison with the canonical IPA value of the symbol {{angbr IPA|ɕ}}). But again, none of that is in the source. [[User:Sol505000|Sol505000]] ([[User talk:Sol505000|talk]]) 22:24, 25 October 2021 (UTC) |
||
== Ambiguous text part == |
|||
The indication: "the area behind the alveolar ridge (the gum line)" is ambiguous. It does not make clear whether: |
|||
* the area behind the alveolar ridge = the gum line; |
|||
* or: the alveolar ridge = the gum line, |
|||
and somehow I am not enabled to change the text to: |
|||
"the area behind the alveolar ridge (the alveolar ridge being the gum line)".[[User:Redav|Redav]] ([[User talk:Redav|talk]]) 17:35, 12 July 2024 (UTC) |