Talk:Voiced palatal fricative

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Linguistics / Phonetics   
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Phonetics Task Force.
 

Swedish usage question[edit]

I'm aware that some speakers consider this sound interchangeable with the voiced palatal approximant [j]. On the whole, though, how many Swedes would associate that substitution with dialects or foreign accents? ISNorden 00:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I am a native speaker of Norwegian rather than Swedish, but I have a hard time associating Swedish "jord" with the voiced palatal fricative. Even the article on Swedish phonology gives the same example as "jord: /juːrd/", and the pronunciation sample provided is also using [j]. It does NOT match e.g. Dutch 'goed'. I can't comment on dialects, but to my ears, this just doesn't match for standard Swedish 'jord'. Stian (talk) 13:57, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

German usage?[edit]

I'm German native speaker and I clearly use the voiced palatal fricative. Maybe it's just my dialect (Western Ruhr-German/ Rhinelandic), can anybody say something about that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.253.119.238 (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)


Komi messup[edit]

"In only four of the languages (Komi, Margi, Belgian Standard Dutch,[1] Modern Greek) this sound occurs along with its voiceless counterpart." I cannot imagine what the source of this statement can be, there is no voiced or voiceless palatal fricative in Komi, just check the linked article on Komi language... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.135.104.167 (talk) 08:20, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

There were also several other problems with that statement. I have tried to correct it. --JorisvS (talk) 15:03, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

English example[edit]

I took out the English example, and am putting it here. When I say the word "yet", I very clearly use the /j/ sound, and since there is no source given for which English dialect or dialects (if any) use this sound, I think that it should remain here until such a citation is found.

  • English: yet [ʝet], "though, still, nevertheless"

--Tabun1015 16:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, considering that it also provides a translation of yet that is not, well, "yet", I'd say it's probably a joke or blatant attempt at original research. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 17:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Might year be a better example? For that matter, /j/ before /i/ could work in a lot of other languages, too. --Tropylium 07:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
I firmly believe that this is a homophone for specific instances of [j]: mid/closed vowels - the more closed the vowel, the more likely the "ʝ", like Tropylium said. This would expand to realizations of vowels, namely accents and dialects such as Southern, being prone to pronounce "yet" as [jet] rather than [jɛt], and "you" as closer to [jɨɯ] than [jəʊ]. And thus, this logically solves the issue of "ye" being hard to pronounce as [ji]. Try saying "ye" yourself. It's easier to pronounce it as [ʝi]. ...Slightly unrelated, but I think it's doubly so when it comes to the "nya nya" teasing utterance: [njæ] → [ɲʝæ̃ː]. The recognized optimal pronunciation retroflexes the consonants to "slur" the sound, giving the intended effect. Squirrelous (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
We can't simply listen to ourselves to determine such phonetic nuances and we certainly can't generalize about English speakers based on our own original research. We need sources for that sort of thing.
That's why I didn't edit it in myself - I assumed that someone with more academic access than myself would be inspired, either to investigate or to pull out a counterexample. I do admit fault for choosing this field of interest, though. Squirrelous (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

UPSID[edit]

We can link directly to it right here [1]. No way to put it down to the relevant serch results, however. Citable?

Also, the current percentage seems to be 12/451 which is a little higher (2.2% vs. 2.7%). --Trɔpʏliʊmblah 13:50, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Audio for goed [ʝut] sounds like [xut][edit]

Direct link to file: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Nl-goed_%28Belgium%29.ogg

I suggest removing it from this page.

Lfdder (talk) 15:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)