Hello all. I've asked this question before but basically threw up my hands and wandered away. Now that I'm making a more concerted effort to learn Esperanto, it has become more of an issue for me. To wit, what is the difference between h and hx? Now, I realize that on the surface it's an odd question; however, I'm talking about sounds.

The Esperanto 'h' seems to be a soft h - Ho Ho Ho would sound like Santa Claus greeting children. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) However, the Esperanto 'hx' seems to be almost a hard k sound. Yes, I realize that it's not and that's where I need your help. However, please let me explain some of my confusion with an example. Vikipedio has an entry for Mikaelo (the name Michael; I was looking up the Archangel) and says:

Vikipedio:
Mikaelo, aŭ etimologie kaj laŭfundamente Miĥaelo, estas vira persona nomo.

To me this indicates (perhaps incorrectly) that some have started pronouncing 'hx' as a 'k' even though it's not quite right. Granted, to my ear, it sounds better as a 'k' so, perhaps, I'm a bit biased.

I've been told, "Oh, it's like the Spanish 'j' or like the Spanish 'll'." However, neither of those reflect my experience. I lived in Peru as a missionary for almost two years and those letters sounded like the English 'h' and the English 'y' respectively. (Well, sorta. the Spanish 'll' can sound like the Esperanto 'jx' in northern Chile which slightly influenced the pronunciation in southern Peru.) Perhaps there are Spanish speaking locations that use them differently but certainly not in the parts of Peru where I lived.

So, does anyone have some suggestions to help me work on the pronunciation?

Here are some links:

http://eo.lernu.net/lernado/gramatiko/konciza/elpa...

Ĥ - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_velar_fric...
H - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_glottal_fr...

ludomastro:

Vikipedio:
Mikaelo, aŭ etimologie kaj laŭfundamente Miĥaelo, estas vira persona nomo.

To me this indicates (perhaps incorrectly) that some have started pronouncing 'hx' as a 'k' even though it's not quite right. Granted, to my ear, it sounds better as a 'k' so, perhaps, I'm a bit biased.

You've misinterpreted the entry, I think. It is saying that there are two different translations of the name with two different pronunciations. It is not saying that the hx sound ever morphed into a k pronunciation.

Some people find hx hard to pronounce, so for some words, there are alternate forms of the word, one with k and one with hx. The "fundamental" version is usually with hx. You find these words used interchangeably (arhxitekturo and arkitekturo have the same meaning) but have different pronunciations. You can't do it any place you find hx; for example, if you found hxoro (chorus) hard to pronounce, you can't use "koro" as a substitution because that word already exists and it means "heart". People say "koruso" if they can't pronounce hxoro.

In any case, hx is a standard European gutteral sound, like in German or Russian, like in the name of the composer Bach, kind of like the sound of clearing your throat. Or in the sad sigh, "Ach...". You hear it in many Hebrew words, I don't know if that helps. It's first sound in the name of the holiday Chanukah, or the ch in the Hebrew toast "l'chaim!", or like the bread challah (which is not hala and not ĉala). Hopefully at least one of these rings a bell with you.

It's hard to talk about in English since we don't have a fixed letter combination that shows this sound - but we usually write it as ch or kh. Since many English speakers aren't used to pronouncing it, unfortunately many words that use it end up with a simple H sound (hanukkah, hasidim, "hallah" ) that really have the hx sound in their correct pronunciation, so that can confuse the issue.

This video might help. It is talking about pronunciation of Hebrew letters but the same things go for Esperanto, and it is clearly showing the difference between h and hx. (hx is equivalent to the two Hebrew letters they are talking about, chet and chaf)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PlmbiM_ASIE

erinja:In any case, hx is a standard European gutteral sound, like in German or Russian, like in the name of the composer Bach, kind of like the sound of clearing your throat. Or in the sad sigh, "Ach...". You hear it in many Hebrew words, I don't know if that helps. It's first sound in the name of the holiday Chanukah, or the ch in the Hebrew toast "l'chaim!", or like the bread challah (which is not hala and not ĉala). Hopefully at least one of these rings a bell with you.

No, this is not true. The ĥ is pronounced softly, with a [x] sound, the voiceless velar fricative (link with sound, Wikipedia), like in the Belgian and Brabandic Dutch "groot" or the Scottish English "loch". The Hebrew words you're talking about (I saw the video), are pronounce with a mild [χ], voiceless uvular fricatives (link with sound, Wikipedia). Source: PMEG
Personally I'm mildly annoyed by the sound of the [χ], because, to me, it sounds way too harsh and unfriendly, so I'd advice using the [x], but that's just my opinion.
And if you can, try to use <ĥ> [x] rather than to replace it with , as it is how it's supposed to be pronounced. There aren't too many words with <ĥ>,

EratoNysiad:No, this is not true. The ĥ is pronounced softly, with a [x] sound, the voiceless velar fricative (link with sound, Wikipedia), like in the Belgian and Brabandic Dutch "groot" or the Scottish English "loch". The Hebrew words you're talking about (I saw the video), are pronounce with a mild [χ], voiceless uvular fricatives (link with sound, Wikipedia). Source: PMEG
Personally I'm mildly annoyed by the sound of the [χ], because, to me, it sounds way too harsh and unfriendly, so I'd advice using the [x], but that's just my opinion.
And if you can, try to use <ĥ> [x] rather than to replace it with , as it is how it's supposed to be pronounced. There aren't too many words with <ĥ>,

You seem to be assuming that Esperanto has a super rigid pronunciation, and that everyone will gasp in horror if someone's voiceless fricative is velar versus uvular (a concept that Zamenhof probably never even heard of). Hx is not that common a letter and frankly the exact pronunciation is not super important, so long as it is clearly distinguished from h and k. If you think my example is bad, maybe you should post a video with actual sounds (also one that compares the hx sound with h and k, so the learner can hear the difference), rather than giving a Belgian/Brabandic Dutch word that few non-Dutch speakers have probably ever heard of, or a Scottish word that frankly, most English speakers make little or no attempt to pronounce with a fricative of any sort ("lock" is the pronunciation I usually hear).

Zamenhof described Esperanto pronunciation not with IPA but with example letters from various languages. I have zero doubt that if there had been a Hebrew pronunciation guide, it would have said to pronounce hx like one of the two Hebrew fricatives, and not given lots of explanation on how it is really meant to be velar and not uvular.

99% of Esperantists did not learn pronunciation with the IPA, so splitting hairs between two very similar IPA sounds is not really helpful to someone who is just trying to get a good approximation of the right sound.

erinja:You seem to be assuming that Esperanto has a super rigid pronunciation, and that everyone will gasp in horror if someone's voiceless fricative is velar versus uvular (a concept that Zamenhof probably never even heard of). Hx is not that common a letter and frankly the exact pronunciation is not super important, so long as it is clearly distinguished from h and k. If you think my example is bad, maybe you should post a video with actual sounds (also one that compares the hx sound with h and k, so the learner can hear the difference), rather than giving a Belgian/Brabandic Dutch word that few non-Dutch speakers have probably ever heard of, or a Scottish word that frankly, most English speakers make little or no attempt to pronounce with a fricative of any sort ("lock" is the pronunciation I usually hear).

Zamenhof described Esperanto pronunciation not with IPA but with example letters from various languages. I have zero doubt that if there had been a Hebrew pronunciation guide, it would have said to pronounce hx like one of the two Hebrew fricatives, and not given lots of explanation on how it is really meant to be velar and not uvular.

99% of Esperantists did not learn pronunciation with the IPA, so splitting hairs between two very similar IPA sounds is not really helpful to someone who is just trying to get a good approximation of the right sound.

I said that it was just my opinion, I never said everyone would, and I'm not grasping in horror if you do either. I wanted to include, (but removed it as it sounded whiny, but apparently I should've included it) that I actually have no problem with the "mild" [χ], as is used in standard Dutch, which is the one hardly distinguishable from the [x], but rather the hard [χ] that is used in Holland (AFAIK), which is indistinguishable from clearing your throat really loudly.
But sure, I'll make a video. Sen Probleme.

As for the Hebrew guide thing. I'd agree on this. This is what most learning methods also do, which makes it clear who's from where. I only learned IPA because I've been a conlanger for quite some time, and I used these characters. Otherwise, I'd never have known either, and I were to pronounce ĥ with a hard [χ] like the Hollanders do.

Also, I might understand what you mean, as only now I realize that, to the untrained* ear, the two sounds sound rather similar.

*Not having heard either all that much.

ludomastro:
I've been told, "Oh, it's like the Spanish 'j' or like the Spanish 'll'." However, neither of those reflect my experience. I lived in Peru as a missionary for almost two years and those letters sounded like the English 'h' and the English 'y' respectively. (Well, sorta. the Spanish 'll' can sound like the Esperanto 'jx' in northern Chile which slightly influenced the pronunciation in southern Peru.) Perhaps there are Spanish speaking locations that use them differently but certainly not in the parts of Peru where I lived.

Spanish is spoken in a lot of countries. As far as I know the Esperanto sound for ĥo letter doesn't exist in the Spanish language of America.

ĥ = j of the north part of Spain.
j almost = y and ll, I think in most of the regions of the spanishphere
ĵ = y and ll in, I think, most of the regions of Argentina, Uruguay and maybe Chile (not sure about the last one). In some places of that south region y and ll are more like ŝ.
h = j of the most parts of the spanishphere (and like the english h).

Ĝis, Novatago.

erinja:99% of Esperantists did not learn pronunciation with the IPA, so splitting hairs between two very similar IPA sounds is not really helpful to someone who is just trying to get a good approximation of the right sound.

Especially considering that the different translations of the Fundamenta Gramatiko give different sounds for ĥ. For instance the Russian translation equates it to [x], while the German equates it to either [ç] (ich), [x] (Buch) or [χ] (Bach).

nornen:

erinja:99% of Esperantists did not learn pronunciation with the IPA, so splitting hairs between two very similar IPA sounds is not really helpful to someone who is just trying to get a good approximation of the right sound.

Especially considering that the different translations of the Fundamenta Gramatiko give different sounds for ĥ. For instance the Russian translation equates it to [x], while the German equates it to either [ç] (ich), [x] (Buch) or [χ] (Bach).

Which probably goes to show that IPA is more picky about distinctions. Most lay people would just say, "You know, that scratchy sound you make in the back of your throat."

--

Dankon al cxiuj. I found the videos and wiki links helpful. I'll just need to practice more. Make the sound at the beginning or end of a word (e.g. hxoro) seems OK but I'm struggling to do it in the middle of a word (e.g. Mihxaelo). I'll keep working on it.