> weird. I didn't understand a thing that you said, and maybe I'm > mispronouncing "x" but I can discern a difference between /i'i/ and > /ixi/. I judge which one I'm hearing based on whether or not I can hear > that throat rattling sound.
There'll not be any rattling in your throat, but it might be that you produce /x/ in /ixi/ with a tighter constriction than /'/ in /i'i/, and that this causes saliva to vibrate in the narrow channel, giving rise to the phonetic phenomenon called 'scrape'.
Stevo:
> And: I have no problem differentiating between {i'i} and {ixi}.
With regard to differentiating in your speech, one possibility is that you might be deluded (as people often are about their own speech), and another, more likely, is that you have fixed on allophones that are reliably distinct. Perhaps you have [θ] in /i'i/; or perhaps you have a scrapey [x] in /ixi/.
With regard to differentiating in your hearing, I would wager that you can't reliably differentiate between /x/ and voiceless glide realizations of /'/ in /i_i/; afaik no language has minimal pairs contrasting voiceless approximants and fricatives.
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:47 AM, And Rosta <and.ro...@gmail.com > <mailto:and.ro...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> It's phonetically impractical to get [h] between most vowels, > because a criterion for [h] is that there is no aerodynamically > significant supraglottal narrowing of stricture. So while [h] for > /'/ in /e'e/ or /y'y/ is practicable, [h] for /'/ in, say, /o'o/ or > /u'u/ or /i'i/ is not (because the flanking vowels create > aerodynamically significant supraglottal stricture).
> One can easily observe that [aha] and [axa] are rather easy to > differentiate, whereas /i'i/ and /ixi/ will be effectively > indistinguishable (as [aça]) unless a very different allophone of > /'/, such as [θ], is used.
> --And.
> Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG, On 30/09/2010 01:48:
> Krzysztof Sobolewski wrote:
> Dnia środa, 29 września 2010 o 19:13:54 Jorge Llambías > napisał(a):
> 2010/9/29 Krzysztof Sobolewski <jez...@interia.pl > <mailto:jez...@interia.pl>>:
> So could some confirm that using the same sound for > {x} and {'} does not introduce ambiguity? :)
> It introduces plenty of ambiguity. Just consider any > CV'V cmavo for a > start, which becomes indistinguishable from the two > cmavo CV xV.
> Well then, I think I'll stick with silent {'}. But this is > problematic with things like {du'u} or {zo'o}. Is there any > hope for people who don't see (hear) any difference between > [x] and [h] (both in IPA, according to Wikipedia)? ;)
> I haven't been following this, but "'" can be any voiceless > glide (approximant), not necessarily IPA "h".
> Occasionally, the glottal "fricatives" are called > approximants, since > [h] typically has no more frication than voiceless > approximants, but
> > they are often phonations of the glottis without any accompanying > > manner or place of articulation.
> suggesting that the thing to avoid in distinguishing x and h is > the noticeable frication. Since I don't know Polish, I can't > help beyond that point. But perhaps our Russian native speakers > have a similar problem and could comment.
> (People have at times chosen to express the rule as "any > non-lojbanic voiceless consonant", with the most striking > example being someone here in Virginia who used a voiceless "th" > fricative. As I recall, it sounded real funny, but it was > understandable.)
> lojbab
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com > <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > <mailto:lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
I believe that And is right about the contrast between [ihi] and [ixi] being almost nil when being heard. I recorded my voice to test this. At first my [ihi] and [ixi] sounded distinct, but then I realized that I was pronouncing [ihi] with a breathy voice [h] (i.e. [ɦ], often an allophone of /h/ in English e.g. {behind}). When I use a true voiceless [h], the contrast with [x] almost vanishes in the [i_i] position. However, the [ɦ] v. scrapeless [x] contrast does work in my ear, though it is probably not the easiest for everyone.
I'm guessing that [ɦ] is already a de_facto allophone of /'/ in Lojban as spoken by Anglophones.
On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:10 PM, And Rosta <and.ro...@gmail.com> wrote: > Luke Bergen, On 30/09/2010 14:26:
> weird. I didn't understand a thing that you said, and maybe I'm >> mispronouncing "x" but I can discern a difference between /i'i/ and /ixi/. >> I judge which one I'm hearing based on whether or not I can hear that >> throat rattling sound.
> There'll not be any rattling in your throat, but it might be that you > produce /x/ in /ixi/ with a tighter constriction than /'/ in /i'i/, and that > this causes saliva to vibrate in the narrow channel, giving rise to the > phonetic phenomenon called 'scrape'.
> Stevo:
>> And: I have no problem differentiating between {i'i} and {ixi}.
> With regard to differentiating in your speech, one possibility is that you > might be deluded (as people often are about their own speech), and another, > more likely, is that you have fixed on allophones that are reliably > distinct. Perhaps you have [θ] in /i'i/; or perhaps you have a scrapey [x] > in /ixi/. > With regard to differentiating in your hearing, I would wager that you > can't reliably differentiate between /x/ and voiceless glide realizations of > /'/ in /i_i/; afaik no language has minimal pairs contrasting voiceless > approximants and fricatives.
> --And.
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 4:47 AM, And Rosta <and.ro...@gmail.com <mailto: >> and.ro...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> It's phonetically impractical to get [h] between most vowels, >> because a criterion for [h] is that there is no aerodynamically >> significant supraglottal narrowing of stricture. So while [h] for >> /'/ in /e'e/ or /y'y/ is practicable, [h] for /'/ in, say, /o'o/ or >> /u'u/ or /i'i/ is not (because the flanking vowels create >> aerodynamically significant supraglottal stricture).
>> One can easily observe that [aha] and [axa] are rather easy to >> differentiate, whereas /i'i/ and /ixi/ will be effectively >> indistinguishable (as [aça]) unless a very different allophone of >> /'/, such as [θ], is used.
>> --And.
>> Bob LeChevalier, President and Founder - LLG, On 30/09/2010 01:48:
>> Krzysztof Sobolewski wrote:
>> Dnia środa, 29 września 2010 o 19:13:54 Jorge Llambías >> napisał(a):
>> 2010/9/29 Krzysztof Sobolewski <jez...@interia.pl >> <mailto:jez...@interia.pl>>:
>> So could some confirm that using the same sound for >> {x} and {'} does not introduce ambiguity? :)
>> It introduces plenty of ambiguity. Just consider any >> CV'V cmavo for a >> start, which becomes indistinguishable from the two >> cmavo CV xV.
>> Well then, I think I'll stick with silent {'}. But this is >> problematic with things like {du'u} or {zo'o}. Is there any >> hope for people who don't see (hear) any difference between >> [x] and [h] (both in IPA, according to Wikipedia)? ;)
>> I haven't been following this, but "'" can be any voiceless >> glide (approximant), not necessarily IPA "h".
>> Occasionally, the glottal "fricatives" are called >> approximants, since >> [h] typically has no more frication than voiceless >> approximants, but
>> > they are often phonations of the glottis without any >> accompanying >> > manner or place of articulation.
>> suggesting that the thing to avoid in distinguishing x and h is >> the noticeable frication. Since I don't know Polish, I can't >> help beyond that point. But perhaps our Russian native speakers >> have a similar problem and could comment.
>> (People have at times chosen to express the rule as "any >> non-lojbanic voiceless consonant", with the most striking >> example being someone here in Virginia who used a voiceless "th" >> fricative. As I recall, it sounded real funny, but it was >> understandable.)
>> lojbab
>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the >> Google >> Groups "lojban" group. >> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com >> <mailto:lojban@googlegroups.com>.
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> >> <mailto:lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com<lojban%252Bunsubscribe@google groups.com>>.
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "lojban" group. >> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "lojban" group. > To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<lojban%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
If [pɛ.i] = [pɛi], what about cmavo stress rules? According to CLL 3.3 a comma is a syllable break, but according to LBG 3.9 a diphthong always counts as one syllable. On what syllable would [pɛ.i] be stressed, given that [pɛi] only has one syllable to stress?
On Thursday, September 30, 2010 8:01:20 AM UTC-4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Thursday 30 September 2010 02:35:15 Krzysztof Sobolewski wrote:
> > {ei} is a diphtong; we don't have "official" diphtongs in Polish, but the
> > difference between "pei" (for {pe'i}) and "pej" (for {pei}) is very > clear.
> > When I want to be really precise when I'm writing "phonetically" using
> > Polish ortography, I write "pe-i" for {pe'i} (assuming silent {'}, of
> > course).
> In Lojban [pɛi] and [pɛ.i] are the same word, while [pɛhi] is a different > word. Whether the first two would be the same in Polish is irrelevant. > Languages differ in how they divide sound space.
> Another example, from Romance languages: I once was talking about the > jatobá > (fr:courbaril, es:guapinol, jbo:kurbarile), which is an ingredient in an > herbal medicine I take, with a Brazilian, who deals in woods, including > jatobá. I said [ʒato'ba]. He corrected me: it's [ʒatɔ'ba]. In French, as > far > as I know, [ɔ] occurs only in closed syllables (a minimal pair > is "saute/sotte"), while in Spanish there is no distinction between [ɔ] > and > [o]. (The English realization of [ɔ] and [o] is different, so even though > English is my first language, I relied on French, my second, when speaking > Portuguese.)
> Pierre
> -- > The Black Garden on the Mountain is not on the Black Mountain.
On Thursday, November 01, 2012 13:00:16 jesushlinc...@gmail.com wrote:
> If [pɛ.i] = [pɛi], what about cmavo stress rules? According to CLL 3.3 a
> comma is a syllable break, but according to LBG 3.9 a diphthong always
> counts as one syllable. On what syllable would [pɛ.i] be stressed, given
> that [pɛi] only has one syllable to stress?
There's no official rule yet about which vowel of a diphthong to stress. I think that, in a stressed diphthong, the first vowel of a falling diphthong and the second vowel of a rising diphthong should be stressed: éi, ió, uí, iú.
There is no rule about stressing cmavo, except that, if stressed, a cmavo before a brivla may need to be separated from it by a pause. E.g. "lókratáigo" = "lokra tai go" (crustacean like iff) but "ló.kratáigo" = "lo krataigo" (a hawthorn).
But the question as to stress is only tangential to the underlying phonotactical issue that it implies--namely, first off, zo pei is defined as being, by definition, one syllable because it contains only a non-syllabic consonant and diphthong, as per LBG 3.9. However, the allophonic pronunciation zo pe,i [pɛ.i] phonetically contains two syllables. Because under CLL 3.3 the comma can be pronounced as an apostrophe in all situations (which is a 'rule' most jbopre to my understanding already pretend never existed in the first place), but also under the same CLL chapter as well as LGB a comma is quote a "syllable break" which is pronounced as two distinct syllables, it is clear that zo pei, if considered phonologically equivalent to zo pe,i, would then have to constitute both one and two syllables simultaneously, which doesn't seem to make much sense. This is not even mentioning the potential confusion with zo pe'i, with which the main differentiation between it and zo pei seems to be moreso the disyllabicity as opposed to the presence or nonpresence of an [h] phoneme/allophone.
On Thursday, November 1, 2012 4:52:31 PM UTC-4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
> On Thursday, November 01, 2012 13:00:16 jesush...@gmail.com <javascript:>wrote: > > If [pɛ.i] = [pɛi], what about cmavo stress rules? According to CLL 3.3 a > > comma is a syllable break, but according to LBG 3.9 a diphthong always > > counts as one syllable. On what syllable would [pɛ.i] be stressed, given > > that [pɛi] only has one syllable to stress?
> There's no official rule yet about which vowel of a diphthong to stress. I > think > that, in a stressed diphthong, the first vowel of a falling diphthong and > the > second vowel of a rising diphthong should be stressed: éi, ió, uí, iú.
> There is no rule about stressing cmavo, except that, if stressed, a cmavo > before a brivla may need to be separated from it by a pause. E.g. > "lókratáigo" > = "lokra tai go" (crustacean like iff) but "ló.kratáigo" = "lo krataigo" > (a > hawthorn).
Except that commas are only allowed in cmevla, so pe,i isn't valid as a
lojbanic word anyhow. "pei" is just one syllable Pronouncing it as two is
liable, IMHO, to be heard as pe.i or pe'i and should be avoided.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 4:13 PM, <jesushlinc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But the question as to stress is only tangential to the underlying
> phonotactical issue that it implies--namely, first off, zo pei is defined
> as being, by definition, one syllable because it contains only a
> non-syllabic consonant and diphthong, as per LBG 3.9. However, the
> allophonic pronunciation zo pe,i [pɛ.i] phonetically contains two
> syllables. Because under CLL 3.3 the comma can be pronounced as an
> apostrophe in all situations (which is a 'rule' most jbopre to my
> understanding already pretend never existed in the first place), but also
> under the same CLL chapter as well as LGB a comma is quote a "syllable
> break" which is pronounced as two distinct syllables, it is clear that zo
> pei, if considered phonologically equivalent to zo pe,i, would then have to
> constitute both one and two syllables simultaneously, which doesn't seem to
> make much sense. This is not even mentioning the potential confusion with
> zo pe'i, with which the main differentiation between it and zo pei seems to
> be moreso the disyllabicity as opposed to the presence or nonpresence of an
> [h] phoneme/allophone.
> mi'e la'oi jesushlincoln
> On Thursday, November 1, 2012 4:52:31 PM UTC-4, Pierre Abbat wrote:
>> On Thursday, November 01, 2012 13:00:16 jesush...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > If [pɛ.i] = [pɛi], what about cmavo stress rules? According to CLL 3.3
>> a
>> > comma is a syllable break, but according to LBG 3.9 a diphthong always
>> > counts as one syllable. On what syllable would [pɛ.i] be stressed,
>> given
>> > that [pɛi] only has one syllable to stress?
>> There's no official rule yet about which vowel of a diphthong to stress.
>> I think
>> that, in a stressed diphthong, the first vowel of a falling diphthong and
>> the
>> second vowel of a rising diphthong should be stressed: éi, ió, uí, iú.
>> There is no rule about stressing cmavo, except that, if stressed, a cmavo
>> before a brivla may need to be separated from it by a pause. E.g.
>> "lókratáigo"
>> = "lokra tai go" (crustacean like iff) but "ló.kratáigo" = "lo krataigo"
>> (a
>> hawthorn).
> To post to this group, send email to lojban@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> lojban+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/lojban?hl=en.
