Beiträge: 28
Sprache: English
KStef (Profil anzeigen) 16. Januar 2016 22:44:24
![ridego.gif](/images/smileys/ridego.gif)
Sorry for my English. I'm still working on it
![okulumo.gif](/images/smileys/okulumo.gif)
nornen (Profil anzeigen) 18. Januar 2016 16:24:37
Tsahraf:I was wondering just recently whether hxo was uvular or velar.When we look at the Fundamento we find various definitions of ĥ:
- The French grammar defines it as "a strongly aspirated h", hence glottal (although I have no idea what /hʰ/ or /h̤/ is supposed to mean).
- The English grammar defines is as Scottish , hence /x/, i.e. velar.
- The German grammar defines is as , hence either /x/, /ç/ or /χ/, i.e. velar, palatal or uvular.
- The Russian grammar defines it as , hence /x/, /xʲ/ or /ɣ/, i.e. velar.
- Same for Polish.
So I daresay that any fricative from palatal to glottal should be acceptable. Maybe you should exclude the glottal fricative in order to maintain the difference between and <ĥ>.
EratoNysiad (Profil anzeigen) 18. Januar 2016 18:18:55
nornen:The /hʰ/ is the aspirated /h/. /ç/ sounds more like ŝ though.Tsahraf:I was wondering just recently whether hxo was uvular or velar.When we look at the Fundamento we find various definitions of ĥ:
- The French grammar defines it as "a strongly aspirated h", hence glottal (although I have no idea what /hʰ/ or /h̤/ is supposed to mean).
- The English grammar defines is as Scottish , hence /x/, i.e. velar.
- The German grammar defines is as , hence either /x/, /ç/ or /χ/, i.e. velar, palatal or uvular.
- The Russian grammar defines it as , hence /x/, /xʲ/ or /ɣ/, i.e. velar.
- Same for Polish.
So I daresay that any fricative from palatal to glottal should be acceptable. Maybe you should exclude the glottal fricative in order to maintain the difference between and <ĥ>.
Vestitor (Profil anzeigen) 18. Januar 2016 18:24:01
EratoNysiad:/ç/ sounds more like ŝ though.Surely more like 's' rather than ŝ.
nornen (Profil anzeigen) 18. Januar 2016 19:17:25
EratoNysiad:You can find /ç/ for instance in the German word "ich".nornen:The /hʰ/ is the aspirated /h/. /ç/ sounds more like ŝ though.Tsahraf:I was wondering just recently whether hxo was uvular or velar.When we look at the Fundamento we find various definitions of ĥ:
- The French grammar defines it as "a strongly aspirated h", hence glottal (although I have no idea what /hʰ/ or /h̤/ is supposed to mean).
- The English grammar defines is as Scottish , hence /x/, i.e. velar.
- The German grammar defines is as , hence either /x/, /ç/ or /χ/, i.e. velar, palatal or uvular.
- The Russian grammar defines it as , hence /x/, /xʲ/ or /ɣ/, i.e. velar.
- Same for Polish.
So I daresay that any fricative from palatal to glottal should be acceptable. Maybe you should exclude the glottal fricative in order to maintain the difference between and <ĥ>.
In German there are minimal pairs between /ç/ and /ʃ/: Wicht - wischt. Eo: vijt - viŝt. IPA: [vɪçt - vɪʃt]
Vestitor:Surely more like 's' rather than ŝ.There are also minimal pairs between /ç/ and /s/: Recht - Rest. Eo: rejt - rest. IPA: [r̺ɛçt - r̺ɛst]
In general, /ç/ is dorsal, while /s/ and /ʃ/ are coronal.
/s/ and /ʃ/ are sibilants, while /ç/ isn't.
At least to my ears /ç/ doesn't sound anything like /s/ or /ʃ/. It is quite close to /x/ and /χ/ though.
Vestitor (Profil anzeigen) 18. Januar 2016 22:58:57
nornen (Profil anzeigen) 19. Januar 2016 00:26:23
Vestitor:Oh, I thought the reference was to ç as it appears in French, not IPA notation.I generally write graphemes between square brackets, phonemes between slashes and realisations between square brackets. I think this quite standard, too.
<ŭ> /u/ [u̯]
sergejm (Profil anzeigen) 19. Januar 2016 06:37:19