Re: labialization? (was: /x/ and 'inter-Germanic')

Quoting "J. 'Mach' Wust" <j_mach_wust@...>:

> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 19:56:53 +0100, Andreas Johansson <andjo@...> wrote:
>
> >[8\] is mine and BP's homecooked convention to ASCIIify "turned m with short
> >middle leg", a sign that's used in Swedish phonetics to denote a labialized
> >[2]. The sound might more clunkily and analytically be denoted as [2_w]. It
> >may be noted that my lect substitutes plain old boring [u\] for it.
>
> Then, [_w] 'Labialized' is appearently different from 'pronounced with lip
> rounding' (since [2] is already produced with rounded lips), though I was
> assuming these were synonymous. Could you explain the difference?
BP can explain this better than me, but basically, we're talking about two
different kinds of lip rounding. The Swedish labialized vowels are pronounced
with more rounded and somewhat protruded lips compared to the "normal" rounded
ones.

Mostly, this doesn't matter much, and the Swedish "long y" and "long o" sounds
are simply identified with IPA [y:] and [u:], despite that the later is
labialized and the former not.

The trick is that between "long ö" and "long u", the *only* difference is that
the later is labizalized. Writing both as [2:] clearly wouldn't do; thus the
need for an extra symbol.

Germans tend to labialize their rounded vowels a bit, and sometimes hear my [y:
Y] as [i: I]. I don't think I ever ran into the problem with [2].

                                                   Andreas

Reply