From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject India (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
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.
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Also in Avestan[edit]

Avestan[1] uses this term explicitly as well, though I am pretty sure this is from a Gujarati influence Khirad 11:17, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


However, this is difficult to say, so the tone on nǐ mutates into ní. This is incorrect, the sound does change, but it only changes into a half third tone, not into a full 2nd tone.

Internal Sandhi[edit]

I think that the example of internal sandhi is incorrect:

  • Internal sandhi features the alteration of sounds within words at morpheme boundaries, as in sympathy (syn- + pathy).

Wouldn't the "syn" change to "sym" simply because of assimilation to the p because it is much easier to say mp than np? Miss Madeline | Talk to Madeline 19:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I think assimilation is a form of Sandhi. --Krsont 18:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
Actually the proper name of this article should be "assimilation". That's what it's called in linguistics. The term "sandhi" is probably just used by Sanskrit afficionados, and so belongs solely on -- bkhl 17:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Assimilation and sandhi are two different things, though assimilation can be a kind of sandhi. If assimilation doesn't happen at a word or morpheme boundary, it isn't sandhi. Synchronically, in that case, you'd be hard pressed to identify it as assimilation if there was no morpheme boundary, but there are plenty of historical assimilations that aren't sandhi (e.g. Latin septem > Italian sette "seven"). And sandhi needn't be assimilation, either; it can be dissimilation, metathesis, lenition, fortition, etc. as well. —Angr 10:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Absolutely right. And furthermore, the details of what happens phonetically at word boundaries can be quite different from what happens elsewhere. As in Sanskrit, final *-as [əs] before a word beginning with a nasal first assimilates to *-az [əz] and then loses the *z with compensatory lengthening of the preceding [ə] (which falls together with the outcomes of smoothened diphthongs), thus aśvo mama "my horse"; but no such thing happens medially, as in asmi [əsmi] "I am". Alsihler 15:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Is sandhi only for phonetics changes?[edit]

If not what is the name for the change of the writing of the letters at the beginning and end of the world. Is that a phenomena of easying writing like the given sandhi example whow easing of prononciation. I see a potential parallel here. Spayrard 22:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Sandhi vs. morphophonemics[edit]

Future augmentations to this article need to explain this. Hurmata 03:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

is there really a sandhi in french ?[edit]

French liaison is described as an external sandhi but lack the regularity it should have in such a case... seeing it as a sandhi would also means it is a phonetical phenomenon, but when reading the page "liaison" it is obvious that it is rather an historical process. I believe that the definition of sandhi is the modification of a sound and could not normaly produce the adding of a new sound (or suppressing of it as it is correctly said). excuse my english. (motunono in french wikipedia...)

Yes, that is also what I have read. I need a source to convince me that an apple is an example of sandhi. Were English to have *āpple for a apple, that would be sandhi according to the sources I read. Terminology differs over time and between disciplines, so I'd not be surprised to hear a different POV, though. Alastair Haines (talk) 13:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

reflection of sandhi in orthography[edit]

The distinction between a and an - if that is even sandhi at all - is not the only place in English where sandhi is reflected in spelling. Further examples include some assimilations, including the very sympathy already mentioned (thus making the article its own counterexample), as well as the common prefix in-, which is spelled to reflect its assimilation in such words as impractical (in-practical), illogical (in-logical) and irregular (in-regular). Other examples that may or may not qualify as sandhi spellings include the variant forms wanna, gonna, and their ilk, and even less standard spellings like doncha (don't you). Tzinacan (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Internal sandhi across morphemes?[edit]

In a book on Sanskrit (TY Sanskrit by M. Coulson) I found another category of internal sandhi examples. It occurs for example in the word tiSThati (infinitive is sthaa), where the two consonants s and th become retroflex because of the preceding vowel i. Another one is formed by the group of neutral plural nouns, where the suffix -n- may undergo retroflexion (for instance, in indriyaM -> indriyaaNi, because of the -r- in indriyaM).

Does anyone know of examples like these in other languages? Arjunah (talk) 23:23, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

"Like these" how? Retroflection? kwami (talk) 23:28, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
No, I meant internal sandhi "working" across syllables (sorry, I wasn't too clear I guess) Arjunah (talk) 21:56, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Couple of questions[edit]

1st is how come this article is in philosophy section? Isn't this related to grammar??? 2nd is where are the calssifications like 'savarna deergha' sandhi etc.? Elncid (talk) 07:35, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

external Sandhi[edit]

English "a" -> "an" seems a far-fetched case for explanation as sandhi, it would be equally reasonable to call the change in Gaelic from "a" (her) before a consonant to "a h-" (her) before a vowel - perhaps in fact more reasonable since it seems quite likely that "a" originally ended with a consonant (it doesn't cause lenition the initial consonant of a following word) - and I've never heard anyone call it that. Gaelic does of course have external sandhi, sometimes represented in the orthography: what is called urdhubhachadh (caighdean spelling "urú", English "eclipse") in Irish and srònachadh (English "nasalisation") in Scottish is external sandhi, where the final consonant (generally n) of one word interacts with the initial consonant of another; for example something that began as "nan beann" ("of the hills") is now written "na mbeann" in Irish and "nam beann" in Scottish; what started off as "nan craobh" is now written "na gcraobh" in Irish, but this sandhi (present in the pronunciation of most Scottish Gaelic speakers) is not shown in the orthography so we still have "nan craobh" in writing. In Scottish and in Ulster Irish (actually Irish north or east of the cha/ni isogloss) "cha" causes sandhi (although before a consonant it is always written without its final n): for example in Scottish Gaelic "cha tug" is pronounced /xaˈd̪̊ug̊/ (and according to the new orthographic conventions for school examinations "tug" can be written "dug" since grammatically it cannot occur other than after "cha" or "an" so is always pronounced /d̪̊ug̊/). MichealT (talk) 11:46, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

curious observation[edit]

Is sandhi the reason we have the English word "Sandhi" and not the original "Samdhi"?


a discussion of how sandhi interacts with pausa would be interesting. (an intended prosodic break will generally prevent sandhi, but it may occur w an unintended break.) — kwami (talk) 15:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Sandhi in English[edit]

I think it would be helpful if someone familiar with the topic could put in some more about sandhi in English. For example, the article Morphophonology mentions that the three ways of pronouncing the plural morpheme, [s], [z], and [ɪz], and the three ways of pronouncing the past tense morpheme, [t], [d] and [ɪd], are examples of sandhi. Also, at a word boundary [t] + [j] becomes [tʃ ] ("don't you" → "dontcha") and [d] + [j] becomes [dʒ] ("did you" → "didja"). And I wonder whether the pronunciation difference between UK and US English in words like "education" (UK [d.j] → US [dʒ.]) is an example of internal sandhi.

I don't feel confident putting anything in myself because it's been a long time since I read about it and I don't have access to the references any more. Duoduoduo (talk) 23:38, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Description of third tone[edit]

The article says that the third tone of Mandarin is _often_ pronounced as a falling-rising tone in isolation. Should "often" be "always" (or at least "normally")? --BLebow4500 (talk) 04:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)