Talk:Voiceless uvular stop

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 Phonetics Task Force.

Inuktitut contradiction[edit]

The example of [ihipɢiuqtuq] in Inuktitut contradicts the Voiced uvular plosive article (where it is given as [ihipɢeoqtoq]). Mo-Al 23:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

  • It doesn't, though. In Inuktitut, the short phonemes /i/ and /u/ (as opposed to long, /iː/ and /uː/) may be realized as /e/ and /o/, respectively (or /ɛ/ and /ɔ/, respectively). Please see the article on the Inuktitut language (to which you linked), it states this.--Cyningaenglisc 02:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, but it doesn't say when they are realized as that. If they are completely interchangeable, then it would make more sense to give a phonemic description rather than a phonetic one in these articles. Mo-Al 05:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
      • As I understand it, /i/ and /u/ are realized as [e] and [o] when they're adjacent to uvular sounds. —Angr 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
It's not a contradiction, but I can imagine how it is very confusing to readers. Both sounds are uvular stops and the same example, a word that has both sounds, is used. Perhaps changing the example word in one of the pages would be appropriate. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 04:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
The problem is the vowels though - nowhere is it stated when /i/ and /u/ are allophonically realized as [e] and [o], so unless they are in free variation (which there does not seem to be a source for currently) the pages are still in contradiction. Mo-Al 04:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
The two articles don't contradict anymore because they have the exact same word transcribed exactly the same. I fixed it almost a month ago and if someone decides that the [e] [o] thing ought to be reflected in the transcription then they can change both. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 11:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Ah, okay, but I'm going to make it a phonemic, not phonetic, description with slashes. Mo-Al 19:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Good idea. Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 19:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

No [q] in Avar[edit]

The Avar language doesn't have the fortis stop [q:]. Instead, it has two fortis affricates - the aspirated [q͡χʰ:] and the ejective [q͡χʼ:]. The Wikipedia page for Avar has the correct table for these sounds.--Mahtrqerin (talk) 02:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

American English[edit]

I sometimes hear [q] in American English before [l]. For example, American clear sounds like [qʰɫɪə̯ɻ] to me (a non-American). Is that correct?

What country do you live in?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:57, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Why would that matter? The question is whether /k/ is sometimes pronounced [q] or at least something between that and [k] in the position mentioned. Do you have information about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)