Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: OT: Phonetics (IPA)

From:Nikhil Sinha <nsinha_in@...>
Date:Saturday, July 12, 2003, 20:32
Andreas Johansson likis:

> Quoting Nikhil Sinha <nsinha_in@...>: > > > Andreas Johansson likis: > > > > > Quoting Joe <joe@...>: > > > > > > > AFAIK, this is a pretty common confusion in languages with
retroflexes.
> > > > However, I, as a native English speaker, would place dentals and > > alveolars > > > > together, and retroflexes seperately, whereas evidently you would
place
> > > > retroflexes and alveolars together, and dentals seperately. > > > > > > I might point out that for me, whose native language distinguishes
dentals
> > and > > > retroflexes (regardless of whether we phonemize [t`] as /rt/ - it
still
> > > contrasts with [t_d] /t/), alveolars sounds like dentals, not
retroflexes.
> > > > > > Andreas > > > > Question for Andreas: What is your native language? I would still say
that
> > if > > you consider the manner in which alveolars, dentals and retroflexes are > > pronounced, dentals are no doubt closer to alveolars. > > > > But, if you consider the sounds that they produce, definitely, alveolars > > sound closer to retroflexes than dentals. > > > > The difference in opinion may be due to the fact that even if two
languages
> > have alveolar t and d, both language may pronounce it differently. > > My native language is Swedish. > > I'm no phonetician, and cannot say whether alveolars are acoustically
closer
> to retroflexes or dentals, but I am unable to consistently tell dentals
and
> alveolars (alveolars as heard in the varieties of English I've heard)
apart,
> whereas retroflexes sound quite different to me.
I think it all depends on one's native language. Nikhil