mōdgethanc wrote:To an Anglo like me, tenuis sounds more like voiced. I need that aspiration to cue me that it's voiceless.
It sounds lightly aspirated to me.
Moderator:Forum Administrators
mōdgethanc wrote:To an Anglo like me, tenuis sounds more like voiced. I need that aspiration to cue me that it's voiceless.
vijayjohn wrote:Vlürch wrote:vijayjohn wrote:Vlürch wrote:Is hac supposed to be pronounced [hɑt͡ʃ]?
I didn't think so, but apparently it is. See e.g. 6:51 of this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t0fYqwJtkPw
Is there something wrong with my ears, because I hear it as [hɑd͡ʒ] every time?
Including the very first word after 6:51?
ZON wrote:French r to x in the end of words. Mex, noix, joueux...
vijayjohn wrote:Now you're just trying too hard!
ZON wrote:French r to x in the end of words. Mex, noix, joueux...
Vlürch wrote:ZON wrote:French r to x in the end of words. Mex, noix, joueux...
Why?
cHr0mChIk wrote:ó to become ô
cHr0mChIk wrote:The one language whose spelling I'd reform is Polish... It's orthography is just plain strange to me. It differs from all other Slavic languages, and it's usually the language which is in written form the least intelligible to other Slavs. Primarily since it's orthography looks quite confusing.
cHr0mChIk wrote:ń to become ň
ó to become ô
cHr0mChIk wrote:w to become v
cHr0mChIk wrote:rz to become ř
linguoboy wrote:I actually like the distinctiveness of Polish orthography. I like that I can identify it at a glance, that I don't have to hunt for "tells" the way I have to with other Slavic language written in Roman script.
linguoboy wrote:This makes no sense to me.
linguoboy wrote:Why not ž?
linguoboy wrote:If you're going to use v for /v/, why not repurpose w for /w/ instead of retaining ł?
Leopejo wrote:Stay away from my Polish! (and from Russian too, for the matter).
Leopejo wrote:That example text by cHr0mChIk looks like one of those panslavic conlangs, if not Slovio then Slovianski.
Leopejo wrote:Needless to say, I don't agree with the author, and I find both, the Tsar Nikolai I version and the author's own, abominable. It is true that Polish is a completely Slavic language (maybe not vocabulary wise), and Cyrillic is ideal for Slavic languages, but the pronunciation has diverged too much and the compromise between origin of a sound and its current pronunciation is just unbearable.
cHr0mChIk wrote:In modern Polish, ó and u might be pronounced the same; same with ż and rz, but initially they were two separate phonemes (I believe they might still be separate phonemes in some dialects as well)... anyway, orthography needs to reflect the etymology, and I've never had trouble with these, even in times when I didn't speak Polish. For example, on Duolingo, when I had to transcribe a word, I haven't even once confused ó with u; or ż with rz. It's clear where each one goes - words with "ó", have o in other Slavic languages, and words with "rz" have r.
linguoboy wrote:cHr0mChIk wrote:w to become v
If you're going to use v for /v/, why not repurpose w for /w/ instead of retaining ł?
Return to “General Language Forum”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests