Talk:Palatal lateral approximant
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Phonetics, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to phonetics and descriptive phonology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. |
Contents |
[edit] Palatal vs palatalized
Serbocroatian/Slovenian lj/љ is palatalized ([lʲ]), not palatal ([ʎ]) -- a rather small but still audible and consistent difference. (Think of it as a "stronger fusion" of /l/ and /j/ than [ʎ] is.) I bet the same holds for Slovak ľ (it does for Russian ль). Does someone know how ly is pronounced in those Hungarian dialects that haven't made [j] out of it? David Marjanović 23:25 CET-summertime 2005/8/5
[edit] Brazilian Portuguese
I'm a native speaker of Brazilian Portuguese, and we do have this sound (as mentioned in the article). However the sound sample does not represent the sound we recognise as being a palatal lateral approximant. Why is it?
- Hi. I contacted the author. Adiel 01:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Stating that "in most dialects, including the standard, /ʎ/ is pronounced [lj], like English <lli> in "million"" is simply wrong! I've changed this. Adiel 01:37, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- I'm quite confused that Portuguese "lh" is analyzed as this sound, because it sounds darned close to a palatalized [l] to me. If you listen to the sound provided here and compare it with the file "battery.wav" in this zip-file, which is supposed to be a supplement to the section on European Portuguese in the The Handbook of the International Phonetic Association you might see my point. I'm quite used to Russian pronunciation with all its palatalized consonants and I hear much differnce between that and the Portuguese sound. Exactly what feature makes the Russian sounds palatalized and this palatal?
- Peter Isotalo 02:45, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- The first site you mentioned (IPA Lab) keeps asking me a password, but I heard the "battery.wav" sound from the zip file: the "lh" in "pilha" sounds very good to me. Actually I don't speak Russian... but listening to the corresponding sound file (for ʎ) in this site, I can tell that that sound is indeed what I hear in "pilha". Listening to your sound file, it sounds to me much like "y" in Engish "yes" or like "i" in Portuguese "saia"; in fact, I can't see any resemblance between your "lh" and a regular "l" :P Thanks. Adiel 15:21, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- That menas you're clicking the link that says you have to be registered. Try the link in the passage "...you may click here to access a limited version of the chart."
- My recording is supposed to sound similar to a [j], but it's lateral and the tounge isn't really touching the palate. But it's still very relevant to know how the Portuguese sound is supposed to differ from a palatalized [l].
- Peter Isotalo 08:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Spanish
How is the Spanish "ll" different from the Spanish "y"? I've been exposed my whole life to a Central American dialect; is that why I've never heard a difference? Further, listening to the site http://www.paulmeier.com/ipa/consonants.html (if someone can point me to a better place to listen to pronunciations...), I still hear no difference. Nor can I differentiate "m" and "ɱ" there, but I know the difference of those; nor again "ʟ" against yod and "ʎ". --ub3rm4th 19:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
- Please note that Spanish 'll' is only pronounced as a palatal lateral approximant in some dialects. FilipeS 20:56, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
-
- For instance the Argentinian dialect? There, the `ll' sounds considerably more like ʒ to me. --ub3rm4th 18:36, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Voicing
Does the palatal lateral approximant have a voiceless counterpart? Do we not make Voiced _ / Voiceless _ pairs of pages? I searched for "voiced palatal lateral approximant" and this was more than six down on the list. --ub3rm4th 19:09, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Fricative
Is there such thing as a palatal lateral fricative, anywhere in the world of languages?24.21.83.173 02:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Accuracy dispute: Brazilian Portuguese
An annonymous editor has made a substantial addition to the article, claiming that:
- The palatal lateral approximant is no longer the majority pronunciation of the digraph LH in Brazilian Portuguese.
- This pronunciation is becoming disused in Brazilian Portuguese.
No sources were left in the article to support these assertions, and I am challenging them. I have heard that some Brazilian Portuguese speakers pronounce LH as /lj/, but I have no reason to believe in either of the above claims. FilipeS 23:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Sometime ago this very same information was stated on this page, and I deleted it. I repeat what I said then: Stating that in most dialects, including the standard, /ʎ/ is pronounced [lj], like English <lli> in "million" is simply wrong!
- Just because olhos and óleos are pronounced the same, it does not mean that /ʎ/ has changed to /lj/; it may be that /lj/ was changed into /ʎ/. In fact, that's my perception: the sound in óleos is /ʎ/, not /lj/. The same holds for "li" in família.
- I don't think I'm mistaken, but I will try to find the book the article cites. Adiel 17:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I'm confused by what you wrote "Just because olhos and óleos are pronounced the same, it does not mean that /ʎ/ has changed to /lj/; it may be that /lj/ was changed into /ʎ/." That's not logical. It's well known that the original sound in Portuguese was /ʎ/. The same as in Spanish, and Catalan, and Italian, among others. Now, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the /lj/ pronunciation. However, it always seemed to me that most Brazilians used /ʎ/, not /lj/; that's why I disputed the claim. But I may be wrong, as I'm not Brazilian myself. It would be great to have some scholarly source to sort this out... Regards. FilipeS 13:22, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. I understand what you mean, now. FilipeS 19:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] "turned y"
what evidence that the IPA symbol is in fact a "turned y" (as opposed to a mirrored λ -- after all it expresses an l sound)? The Unicode name doesn't count, since IPA predates Unicode, and the Unicode people made similar blunders before. This question has some importance for font design, since the intended application for "IPA palatal lataral approximant" should trump the Unicode character name. dab (𒁳) 11:46, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- Does it make a difference? It turns up the same! FilipeS 19:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
