Fri, 17 Jun 2022 09:25:14 +1200: Ross Clark <
benl...@ihug.co.nz>
scribeva:
>On 17/06/2022 2:08 a.m., Ruud Harmsen via Google Groups
><
goo...@rudhar.com> wrote:
>> On Thursday, June 16, 2022 at 4:04:16 PM UTC+2, Ruud Harmsen via Google Groups <
goo...@rudhar.com> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, June 15, 2022 at 7:46:42 PM UTC+2, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> I have a new doctor -- Vladimir Znamensky -- and I assumed the
>>>> m is soft, i.e. Znam'ensky -- but I asked, and he pronounced it
>>>> completely unmarked. So I asked him to write it in Cyrillic --
>>>> ??????????.
>>>>
>>>> No ?, no hard sign. (Which seems to occur, post-1917,
>>>> only after a prefix.)
>>>>
>>>> Is everything I've read about Russian vowel letters wrong? Or
>>>> is he from a minority dialect? He has a slight accent, as if he
>>>> immigrated around age 12 or so, maybe 30 years ago, when
>>>> that presumably ceased being a problem.
>>> The palatalisation can be only slight sometimes, and difficult to
>>> hear for us. The non-palatals are slightly or heavily velarised, and
>>> what's essential is the difference. For example in the Russian
>>> word for "we", "my", the velarisation is very strong. Cf. mir, meaning
>>> world or peace.
>>
>> Here
https://www.howtopronounce.com/russian/znamensky I hear
>> Znaminsky, with the e higher than I'd expect, no palatalisation of the
>> m, and a clear velarisation of the z and n.
>>
>
>I hear this as initial-stressed,
Now that you mention it, yes, I hear that too.
>with the m palatalized.
>[i] for written /e/ in unstressed syllables after palatalized consonant
>is perfectly standard Russian pronunciation.
It's [I], I think, not [i].