Ranking : The language with more vowels

User avatar
Strigo
Posts:4724
Joined:2002-12-27, 13:16
Real Name:Carlos Reyes Barría
Gender:male
Location:La Florida
Country:CLChile (Chile)
Contact:
Ranking : The language with more vowels

Postby Strigo » 2003-10-24, 1:06

Hey, I wanna make a ranking.

WHAT'S THE LANGUAGE WITH MORE VOWELS??

1.- French (17)
2.- Portuguese (13)
3.- English (12)
4.- Italian (7)
5.- Spanish (5)


I'm not sure about the data, but would you help me?
Aquí es donde traduzco diariamente música israelí del hebreo al español

[flag]cl[/flag] native; [flag]en[/flag] fluent; [flag]il[/flag] lower advanced ; [flag]pt-BR[/flag] read fluently, understand well, speak not so badly (specially after some Itaipava); recently focusing on [flag]sv[/flag][flag]ar[/flag] and I promised myself to finish my [flag]ru[/flag] New Penguin Russian Course: A Complete Course for Beginners in less than a month (12/oct/2013). Wants to wake up one day speaking [flag]ka[/flag][flag]lt[/flag] and any Turkic language.

User avatar
Psi-Lord
Posts:10081
Joined:2002-08-18, 7:02
Real Name:Marcel Q.
Gender:male
Location:Cândido Mota
Country:BRBrazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Postby Psi-Lord » 2003-10-24, 3:49

Oh, Lord... It seems we'll all get different figures — I always thought English had 15 vowel sounds. :shock:

One of my English dictionaries (based on General American) has a table with:

- /i/, /I/, /e/, /E/, /{/, /a/
- /3/, /@/
- /u/, /U/, /o/, /V/, /O/, /A/, /Q/

And the book about English phonetics I'm reading (based on the Received Pronunciation) has a table with:

- /i:/, /i/, /e/, /E/, /{/, /a/
- /@:/, /@/, /V/
- /u:/, /u/, /o/, /O:/, /O/, /A/

:?
português do Brasil (pt-BR)British English (en-GB) galego (gl) português (pt) •• العربية (ar) български (bg) Cymraeg (cy) Deutsch (de)  r n km.t (egy) español rioplatense (es-AR) 日本語 (ja) 한국어 (ko) lingua Latina (la) ••• Esperanto (eo) (grc) français (fr) (hi) magyar (hu) italiano (it) polski (pl) Türkçe (tr) 普通話 (zh-CN)

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 5:30

Actually English is a 12-(phonemic)vowel system language, which has:

[i:], [I], [3:], [e], [@], [u:], [U], [O:], [ae], [^], [A:] and [&] (& represents the inverted cursive a, and A, the cursive a)

Diphthongs are not taken into account!! Nor are English 'nasalized' vowels.

There are 20-(phonemic)vowel systems such as Panjabi, which has:

[i], [I], [e], [ae], [a], [@], [u], [U], [o], [&] and all these do actually have their nasal counterparts...

We must draw a distinction between 'nasals' and 'nasalized' vowels... when a given language has nasal vowels and these vowels are phonemes, they are counted, when these vowels are nasalized, they are not counted into the inventory of vowels... this way, Portuguese has only 7 "phonemic" vowels:

[i], [e], [E], [a], [O], [o], [u]... nasal vowel sounds in Portuguese are rather nasalized oral vowels and not nasal in nature, the same happens to English...

It is said Aranda (an Australian language) to have only [i], [u] and [a] and Greenlandic to have only [e], [a] and [u]... vowel inventories usually follow what's been called 'principle of vowel dispersion'...
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."
~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 5:33

Daniel wrote:Actually, English has 25 distinctive vowel sounds in speech.


English has 12 distinctive vowel sounds... and given a phonetic context it can appear other sounds, but they are not 'that' distinctive... LOL
Last edited by Pittsboy on 2003-10-26, 3:00, edited 1 time in total.
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Saaropean
Posts:8808
Joined:2002-06-21, 10:24
Real Name:Rolf S.
Gender:male
Location:Montréal
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Re: Ranking : The language with more vowels

Postby Saaropean » 2003-10-24, 8:38

That's indeed not easy, because some languages distinguish vowel length, tone, nasality and other things...

Let me see what French has (in SAMPA):
a, A, E, o, @, e, 2, 9, i, O, u, y, A~, o~, E~, 9~
That's 16 vowels, but the dialect I learned in school doesn't distinguish [a] and [A] or [E~] and [9~].

And in German?
a, a:, E, E:, e:, @, I, i:, O, o:, 9, 2:, U, u:, Y, y:, 6
plus diphthongs: aI, aU, OI
more diphthongs with a vocalic R: a6, E6, e6, i6, I6, O6, o6, 96, 26, U6, u6, Y6, y6
Do diphthongs count? Is the difference between long and half-long [e] significant (it's not phonemic and depends on the speaker)? Do those [6] diphthongs count, being "correctly" pronounced with an /r/ consonant instead of [6] by many speakers? So we have something between 17 and over 30 vowels...

On the other hand, there are only 8 or 9 orthographic vowels:
A, pronounced [a] or [a:]
Ä, pronounced [E] or [E:]
E, pronounced [@], [E] or [e:]
I, pronounced [I] or [i:]
O, pronounced [O] or [o:]
Ö, pronounced [9] or [2:]
U, pronounced [U] or [u:]
Ü, pronounced [Y] or [y:]
Y, pronounced like Ü

+diphthongs: AI/EI [aI], AU [aU], ÄU/EU [OI]
And ER? Some dictionaries say it's [6], some say it's [@r]. I'd say it's either [6] or [E6]...

I think the diphthongs should count, because vowel clusters are not permitted in German (unless there's a non-orthographic glottal stop in between).
It's similar to the affricative question: Is [ts] (written Z) one phoneme in German and Slavonic languages or two?

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Re: Ranking : The language with more vowels

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 10:15

Saaropean wrote:That's indeed not easy, because some languages distinguish vowel length, tone, nasality and other things...


As I said above: when languages DO distinguish these features, when these features modify the meaning of words, then you have phonemes! On the contrary, they are only phones of the same phoneme. There must have a distinction between phoneme (a sound which is distinctive in a language system, which distinguish meaning) and phones (sounds which are not distinctive). When I say distinctive, understand as: a sound which differenciates a word.

When you say a language has x or y phoneme vowels (phoneme is what is distinctive) you take into account what people consider to be the Standard language. It is known that different varieties/dialects have different phonemes!

And in German?
a, a:, E, E:, e:, @, I, i:, O, o:, 9, 2:, U, u:, Y, y:, 6
plus diphthongs: aI, aU, OI
more diphthongs with a vocalic R: a6, E6, e6, i6, I6, O6, o6, 96, 26, U6, u6, Y6, y6
Do diphthongs count? Is the difference between long and half-long [e] significant (it's not phonemic and depends on the speaker)? Do those [6] diphthongs count, being "correctly" pronounced with an /r/ consonant instead of [6] by many speakers? So we have something between 17 and over 30 vowels...


I do not know German well to answer you how many phonemes it has, but I do know some basics in phonology, which happens to be my field of study, to ensure you that:
a) diphthongs are the combination of two other phonemes in the language; so they are not phonemes themselves; (it all depends on the criteria and author you use to count them)
b) vocalic (?) /r/: you mean what is usually referred to as 'coloured' as American English word-final [r], which combines with the previous vowel (as in 'betteR'), the vowel still is the SAME vowel, with an extra /r/ phoneme. Then, not a big deal out of it! You are combining a vowel sound + a consonant sound, and it is not one single sound, but two.
c) Are there words in German with different meaning but spoken the same way except for the fact that one of the words have a long vowelthe other one a half-long? Is the answer is YES, then you probably have different phonemes! On the contrary, NO!
d) you can have as many vowels as you wish, I am not arguing that... but the number of phonemes (sounds that distinguish meaning) are not that many... you have a small set of vowels which are phonemes and another amount of sounds which are not phonemes but are spoken in a language due to phonetic context, and those sounds are called allophones.

On the other hand, there are only 8 or 9 orthographic vowels:
A, pronounced [a] or [a:]
Ä, pronounced [E] or [E:]
E, pronounced [@], [E] or [e:]
I, pronounced [I] or [i:]
O, pronounced [O] or [o:]
Ö, pronounced [9] or [2:]
U, pronounced [U] or [u:]
Ü, pronounced [Y] or [y:]
Y, pronounced like Ü


What's the deal of it?

+diphthongs: AI/EI [aI], AU [aU], ÄU/EU [OI]
And ER? Some dictionaries say it's [6], some say it's [@r]. I'd say it's either [6] or [E6]...


Any phonetician will agree that they are two sounds, no matter what vowel you elect to use it with... dictionaries tell you what phones there exist in a language (the possible realizations of phonemes), but not the phonemes themselves... what's important when you look up a word in a dictionary is how it is spoken and not how it is represented in the native speaker's mind... that's why you guys will usually find more vowel sounds (for example) in a language than vowel phonemes, for what a dictionary tells you is the amount of possible realizations of a phoneme when you speak it in a given context...

I think the diphthongs should count, because vowel clusters are not permitted in German (unless there's a non-orthographic glottal stop in between).


What you mean by vowel clusters not permitted in German? We are talking about phonetics and not about writting. You can probably not have the same vowel twice in a row, but you can have different vowels... or am I wrong?

It's similar to the affricative question: Is [ts] (written Z) one phoneme in German and Slavonic languages or two?


Nothing to argue in here: any basics on phonology will show you that IN German the [ts] sound is an affricate. It means that an [s] sound starts as a plosive and soon becomes a fricative, i.e. it is a single sound... in other slavonic languages, such as Polish, I believe, they are distinctive phonemes. Polish differenciates an affricate [ts] (one sound) from a common [ts] (two sounds)... that's why we must use a tie bar on-top of [ts] when representing an affricate in any language, so that no arguments rise.

German has 4 phonemic affricates (one sound and that distinguishes meaning)> pf, ts, tS, dZ
The /R/ phoneme (a big R represents an archiphoneme sound) can have many phones (sounds or allophones)> voiceless uvular, voiced uvular, uvular approximant, uvular tap, trill etc... I believe
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
ekalin
Posts:1850
Joined:2002-06-21, 11:02
Real Name:Eduardo M Kalinowski
Gender:male
Location:Curitiba, PR
Country:BRBrazil (Brasil)
Contact:

Postby ekalin » 2003-10-24, 10:25

Pittsboy wrote:We must draw a distinction between 'nasals' and 'nasalized' vowels... when a given language has nasal vowels and these vowels are phonemes, they are counted, when these vowels are nasalized, they are not counted into the inventory of vowels... this way, Portuguese has only 7 "phonemic" vowels:

[i], [e], [E], [a], [O], [o], [u]... nasal vowel sounds in Portuguese are rather nasalized oral vowels and not nasal in nature, the same happens to English...


Considering the distinction you said yourself below, at least [a] and the nasal [~6] must be distinct vowels, and not allophones, as they distinguish manhã and manha.

As for the others, I think they can also be considered distinct, as you could probably find cases where they distinguish different words, such as in "ponte" vs. "pote".
This gubblick contains many nosklarkish English flutzpahs, but the overall pluggandisp can be glorked from context. – David Moser

User avatar
Luís
Forum Administrator
Posts:7874
Joined:2002-07-12, 22:44
Location:Lisboa
Country:PTPortugal (Portugal)

Postby Luís » 2003-10-24, 10:29

In European Portuguese, the vowels sounds are the following:

Simple Vowels

a, 6, E, e, @, i, O, o, u, 6~, e~, i~, o~, u~ = 14

Semi-Vowels

j, w = 2

Simple Diphthongs

aj, 6j, Oj, oj, Ej, uj, aw, 6w, Ew, ew, @w, iw, i6, ja, j6, jO, jo, jE, je, ju, wa, w6, wE, we, wi = 25

Nasal Diphthongs

6~w~, o~j~, 6~j, u~j~ = 4

Simple Triphthongs

aj6, 6ju, 6j6, @aj, waj = 5

Nasal Triphthongs

j6~w, w6~w, jo~j, wo~j = 4

Total = 54 entities
Quot linguas calles, tot homines vales

User avatar
Luís
Forum Administrator
Posts:7874
Joined:2002-07-12, 22:44
Location:Lisboa
Country:PTPortugal (Portugal)

Postby Luís » 2003-10-24, 10:32

ekalin wrote:Considering the distinction you said yourself below, at least [a] and the nasal [~6] must be distinct vowels, and not allophones, as they distinguish manhã and manha.

As for the others, I think they can also be considered distinct, as you could probably find cases where they distinguish different words, such as in "ponte" vs. "pote".


Sure. Or "som" from "sou". Or even "vi" from "vim".
I don't know how you can simply rule nasal vowels out, Pittsboy...
Quot linguas calles, tot homines vales

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 10:56

ekalin wrote:[i], [e], [E], [a], [O], [o], [u]... nasal vowel sounds in Portuguese are rather nasalized oral vowels and not nasal in nature, the same happens to English...

Considering the distinction you said yourself below, at least [a] and the nasal [~6] must be distinct vowels, and not allophones, as they distinguish manhã and manha.


As for the others, I think they can also be considered distinct, as you could probably find cases where they distinguish different words, such as in "ponte" vs. "pote".[/quote]

The origin of vowel nasality in Portugue comes handy towards an anwer now: it is all Latim's fault! Portuguese only has nasalized vowel and not nasals. Why? Here is why:

[i] x [~i]
lido - lindo
['lidu] - ['l~iNdu] (the N is a superscript 'n')

[e] x [~e]
ledo - lendo
['ledu] - ['l~eNdu]

[o] x [õ]
troco - tronco
['troku] - ['trõWku] (the W is a superscript nasal 'w')

[u] x [~u]
mudo - mundo
['mudu] - ['m~uWdu]

As for 'manhã' and 'manha'

manha x manhã
['m~3ñA] - [m~3'ñ~3]/[m~3'ñã] (the A is the upside-down 'a') (I transcribed 'manhã' twice, so that you can choose the one you prefer)

The word-final 'a' and 'ã' are two different sounds

**** Correction: I talked to my friend, and he made me think about whether a phonemic nasalized 'a' does really exist or not, I need to think about it yet...


---> what I meant with all the examples? To show that there's no opposition among nasal and oral vowels in identical contexts, for, nasal vowels present a nasal ressonance (remember the N?) with the same articulation place i.e., there will always be a superscript homorganic nasal consonant to the plosive which follows.

I could go on and give 'n' other examples, just ask me about them in case you are still not satisfied with my argument towards the non-existance of nasal vowels in Portuguese... I will be glad to explain the other cases for you.
Last edited by Pittsboy on 2003-10-26, 3:07, edited 1 time in total.
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 11:22

As I said, the origin of nasality in Portuguese goes back to Latim: all the 'nasals' have a common origin, they come from the latim [n].

Latim - Portuguese (bold means long vowel)
lana > lãa > lã
sonu > sõo > som
unu > ~uu > um
bene > bem
fine > fim
pinu > pinho
vinu > vinho
pane > pão
fenestra > f~eestra > feestra > fresta
moneta > mõeda > moeda
farina > farinha

When the latim [n] was elided, the nasal consonant would make the preceding vowel nasal. When this sort of nasalization occurred inside words, as in moneta and fenestra, the nasalization was usually deleted.
In word-final position, nasality would be realized, sometimes as a nasalized diphthong, sometimes creating a new consonant (ñ).

It is known that nasals inside words were quite common in Latim, however, [n] was pronounced quite differenciated.

If we take into account the words 'campo', 'canto' and 'banco'... according to the Portuguese variety we are talking about, they can be pronounced as:

[k~3mpu], [k~3ntu] and [b~3nku], this way the nasal assimilates the place of articulation of the following phoneme or

in cases as 'ponto', 'manta' and 'pente':

[põWtu], [m~3Nta] and [p~eJtSi], this way the nasal assimilates the place of articulation of the vowels...

Understanding the origin of this nasal ressonance we still have in Portuguese spots light into the question of whether we have nasal vowels in Portuguese or not...
Last edited by Pittsboy on 2003-10-24, 11:32, edited 1 time in total.
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 11:30

ekalin wrote:As for the others, I think they can also be considered distinct, as you could probably find cases where they distinguish different words, such as in "ponte" vs. "pote".


I, myself, pronounce 'ponte' ['pÕWtSI] and 'pote' ['pOtSI], however, it is almost a concensus that Portuguese has no [Õ] but only [õ].... if this is the case, then 'ponte' and 'pote' have different vowels: ['põWtSI] and ['pOtSI], this way they are no longer distinctive because in one context I have [õ] and in the other [O]... who knows... one more reason to say we have no nasals!
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 11:35

Luís wrote:In European Portuguese, the vowels sounds are the following:

Simple Vowels

a, 6, E, e, @, i, O, o, u, 6~, e~, i~, o~, u~ = 14

Semi-Vowels

j, w = 2

Simple Diphthongs

aj, 6j, Oj, oj, Ej, uj, aw, 6w, Ew, ew, @w, iw, i6, ja, j6, jO, jo, jE, je, ju, wa, w6, wE, we, wi = 25

Nasal Diphthongs

6~w~, o~j~, 6~j, u~j~ = 4

Simple Triphthongs

aj6, 6ju, 6j6, @aj, waj = 5

Nasal Triphthongs

j6~w, w6~w, jo~j, wo~j = 4

Total = 54 entities


Luis, you are describing the PHONETIC chart of European Portuguese and not the PHONEMIC chart...
and just to add a little comment here: Brazilian Portuguese has NO schwa...
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Luís
Forum Administrator
Posts:7874
Joined:2002-07-12, 22:44
Location:Lisboa
Country:PTPortugal (Portugal)

Postby Luís » 2003-10-24, 11:41

Pittsboy wrote:Luis, you are describing the PHONETIC chart of European Portuguese and not the PHONEMIC chart...


So what?
It was not my intention to write any phonemic chart to start with!
Quot linguas calles, tot homines vales

User avatar
Saaropean
Posts:8808
Joined:2002-06-21, 10:24
Real Name:Rolf S.
Gender:male
Location:Montréal
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Saaropean » 2003-10-24, 11:42

Pittsboy wrote:
Saaropean wrote:That's indeed not easy, because some languages distinguish vowel length, tone, nasality and other things...

As I said above: when languages DO distinguish these features, when these features modify the meaning of words, then you have phonemes! On the contrary, they are only phones of the same phoneme. There must have a distinction between phoneme (a sound which is distinctive in a language system, which distinguish meaning) and phones (sounds which are not distinctive). When I say distinctive, understand as: a sound which differenciates a word.

Of course. But some might say a Portuguese [o~] is just a nasalized variant of the vowel [o]. ;-)

Pittsboy wrote:When you say a language has x or y phoneme vowels (phoneme is what is distinctive) you take into account what people consider to be the Standard language. It is known that different varieties/dialects have different phonemes!

Of course. That makes the thing more complicated...

In German, many dialects have diphthongs where the standard language uses simple vowels and many dialects monopthongize diphthongs...

Pittsboy wrote:a) diphthongs are the combination of two other phonemes in the language; so they are not phonemes themselves; (it all depends on the criteria and author you use to count them)

Yes, but only a small number of diphthongs is permitted in the language. [EI] is pronounceable, but it only exists in English loans. [EU] is unpronouceable for most German-speakers.

Pittsboy wrote:b) vocalic (?) /r/: you mean what is usually referred to as 'coloured' as American English word-final [r], which combines with the previous vowel (as in 'betteR'), the vowel still is the SAME vowel, with an extra /r/ phoneme. Then, not a big deal out of it! You are combining a vowel sound + a consonant sound, and it is not one single sound, but two.

Actually it's not a vocalic R, but an orthographic R pronounced as a vowel: When the letter R comes after a vowel and preceding a consonant, it is usually pronounced [6] or, more exactly, as a short [6] that forms a diphthong with the preceding vowel. This pronunciation is often considered substandard, though. So "Pferd" is usually pronounced [pfE6t], though some say it should be [pfErt].

Pittsboy wrote:c) Are there words in German with different meaning but spoken the same way except for the fact that one of the words have a long vowelthe other one a half-long? Is the answer is YES, then you probably have different phonemes! On the contrary, NO!

I know that, that's why I didn't count half-long vowels. I wanted to mention them anyway. ;-)

Pittsboy wrote:d) you can have as many vowels as you wish, I am not arguing that... but the number of phonemes (sounds that distinguish meaning) are not that many... you have a small set of vowels which are phonemes and another amount of sounds which are not phonemes but are spoken in a language due to phonetic context, and those sounds are called allophones.

So what? OK, how many phonemes are there in German (quickly counted without looking it up somewhere):
a, a:, E, E:, e:, (@), I, i:, O, o:, 6, 2:, U, u:, Y, y:, (6) - 15-17 vowels
b, d, f, g, h, j, k, l, m, n, p, r, s, t, v, z, S, C/x, (?), (Z), (ts), (tS), (pf), (dZ) - 18-25 consonants

[@] can often be pronounced [E], might be an allophone. [6] (which used to be [Er] or [@r]) and [a] are not distinguished, but [6] and [a:] are as well as [6] and [@].
[C] and [x] are allophones.
[Z] and [dZ] only exist in loan words.
If, according to Pittsboy, [ts] is one phoneme (an affricative), this should also apply to [tS] and [pf].
At the end of a syllable, a fricative or stop is always voiceless, but in other positions voicedness is distinguished.
The glottal stop is not written and not perceived as a phoneme, but it is usually pronounced in words starting with a vowel ("ich" [?IC]) and in vowel clusters ("naiv" [na"?i:f]).

I didn't take into account the different allophones of /g/ that exist in some dialects (in mine it can be [g], [j], [S] or [x]) or the fact that some dialects don't distinguish voiced and voiceless plosives.

What I wanted to say: It is often not possible to say "exactly" how many vowels or consonants a language has, so one should be careful with the kind of ranking Strigo wants to make.

Pittsboy wrote:
On the other hand, there are only 8 or 9 orthographic vowels:
[...]

What's the deal of it?

Nothing, but some people might have the false perception that orthography says something. ;-)

Pittsboy wrote:
And ER? Some dictionaries say it's [6], some say it's [@r]. I'd say it's either [6] or [E6]...

Any phonetician will agree that they are two sounds, no matter what vowel you elect to use it with...

What do you mean? As far as I can see it, the [@r] pronunciation is an "ideal" no one uses, [E6] is to make it sound "more correct", and [6] is what people usually do, though some say that's "wrong".

Pittsboy wrote:dictionaries tell you what phones there exist in a language

But sometimes dictionaries say how things used to be and claim it "should" be like that, although the language might have changed in the meantime.

Pittsboy wrote:
I think the diphthongs should count, because vowel clusters are not permitted in German (unless there's a non-orthographic glottal stop in between).

What you mean by vowel clusters not permitted in German? We are talking about phonetics and not about writting. You can probably not have the same vowel twice in a row, but you can have different vowels... or am I wrong?

Two vowels in a row only occurs in two cases:
- proper dipthongs ([aI], [aU] or [OI], in English loans [EI], but no others)
- two vowels pronounced distinctly or even with a glottal stop in between ("Kooperation" [ko?OpERa"tsjo:n] etc.)

Pittsboy wrote:German has 4 phonemic affricates (one sound and that distinguishes meaning)> pf, ts, tS, dZ

Yep. But [dZ] only exists in loan words such as "Manager" ["mEnEdZ6] or "Dschungel" ["dZUN@l].

Pittsboy wrote:The /R/ phoneme (a big R represents an archiphoneme sound) can have many phones (sounds or allophones)> voiceless uvular, voiced uvular, uvular approximant, uvular tap, trill etc... I believe

Yep, but that's regional so I didn't mention it. I usually pronounce it as a uvular approximant. And note that /r/:arrow:[6] thing... :shock:

User avatar
wsz
Posts:1781
Joined:2003-06-09, 12:22
Real Name:Waldemar Szostak
Gender:male
Country:PLPoland (Polska)

Postby wsz » 2003-10-24, 11:45

Polish is quite poor in vowels. The vowel lenght is not relevant. There:
a, ą, e, ę, i, o, ó (u), y

so - in Polish there are 8 vowels.

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 11:46

Luís wrote:
Pittsboy wrote:Luis, you are describing the PHONETIC chart of European Portuguese and not the PHONEMIC chart...


So what?
It was not my intention to write any phonemic chart to start with!


So what? If we are talking about the amount of phonemes in a language we count the amount of phonemes and not phones... that's the basic difference between phonetics and phonology... I cannot say that in Portuguese there are 54 phonemes, that's wrong! There are, instead, 54 vowel sounds... and this doesn't make of Portuguese the language with more vowels or so... my whole argument was towards that... I cannot say that Portuguese has phonemic nasal vowel because they are contextually nasalised, this way they do not count for the phonemes inventory....
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
Luís
Forum Administrator
Posts:7874
Joined:2002-07-12, 22:44
Location:Lisboa
Country:PTPortugal (Portugal)

Postby Luís » 2003-10-24, 11:53

Pittsboy wrote:So what? If we are talking about the amount of phonemes in a language we count the amount of phonemes and not phones... that's the basic difference between phonetics and phonology... I cannot say that in Portuguese there are 54 phonemes, that's wrong! There are, instead, 54 vowel sounds... and this doesn't make of Portuguese the language with more vowels or so... my whole argument was towards that... I cannot say that Portuguese has phonemic nasal vowel because they are contextually nasalised, this way they do not count for the phonemes inventory....


I have no idea of what the hell you're talking about. Do remember that not everyone around here studies Linguistics!
I just presented a simple list with portuguese vowel, diphthongs and triphthongs, either nasal or non-nasal sounds. Considering Strigo's question, I think he's more interested in a simple general answer than on this complicated discussion most people don't even understand...
Quot linguas calles, tot homines vales

User avatar
Pittsboy
Posts:1515
Joined:2002-06-28, 5:42
Real Name:Thiago do Nascimento
Gender:male
Location:Toronto, Canada
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Pittsboy » 2003-10-24, 12:01

Saaropean wrote:Of course. But some might say a Portuguese [o~] is just a nasalized variant of the vowel [o]. ;-)


It is indeed!

Of course. That makes the thing more complicated...
In German, many dialects have diphthongs where the standard language uses simple vowels and many dialects monopthongize diphthongs...


Diphthongs are two sounds combined, they are not a special sound which is realized as a single one... one of them is either what's is called the onglide or offglide, this means that either the first vowel is shorter (is not the target of the diphthong) or the second is the shorter of the two...

The glottal stop is not written and not perceived as a phoneme, but it is usually pronounced in words starting with a vowel ("ich" [?IC]) and in vowel clusters ("naiv" [na"?i:f]).


Can a glottal stop distinguish meanng in German?

What I wanted to say: It is often not possible to say "exactly" how many vowels or consonants a language has, so one should be careful with the kind of ranking Strigo wants to make.


It is indeed possible when you say: "in Standard (Hoch?) German there are such and such number of phonemes" or "in this other veriety of German, the phonemes are such and such"... We just need to keep in mind that phonemes are segments that distinguish meaning ONLY... the rest are allophones of a phoneme!

Pittsboy wrote:What do you mean? As far as I can see it, the [@r] pronunciation is an "ideal" no one uses, [E6] is to make it sound "more correct", and [6] is what people usually do, though some say that's "wrong".


Dictionaries only tell you the sounds (phones) and not the phonemes of a language... that's why in dictionaries they use "[ ]" and not "/ /" symbols.
And they are based in some variety one thinks is Standard... :roll:

Two vowels in a row only occurs in two cases:
- proper dipthongs ([aI], [aU] or [OI], in English loans [EI], but no others)
- two vowels pronounced distinctly or even with a glottal stop in between ("Kooperation" [ko?OpERa"tsjo:n] etc.)


That's what I said, I believe that in German it is forbidden the same vowel in a row, but you can have another one in a row (although one may argue they are a few only)...
"It is no good to try to stop knowledge from going forward. Ignorance is never better than knowledge."

~~Enrico Fermi (1901 - 1954)~~

User avatar
NulNuk
Posts:2116
Joined:2002-06-21, 11:12
Real Name:Nicolas
Gender:male
Location:the great NulKie empire on the Moon

Postby NulNuk » 2003-10-24, 12:05

Hebrew has more than 20 vowels variations including diptogs ,
and arround some 15 vowels with out them ,but no one use them ,
they only exist in the diccionary and the bible today ,and maybe some
formal govermental pages .
most ppl found it harder to read the words with vowels ,they only confuse,
and allso you will hardly find ppl that actually knows most of the vowels.
most ppl know about 10 of them probably .
I my self remember 11 ,and looking through the diccionary I found another
4 so ,I know now 15 vowels for sure ,and if I hade more time to waste I
could probably find more .

by the way ,in Castillian ,depending on wich dialect you chuse ,
you have more than the 5 basic vowel ,in most dialects of Castillian you
can say allso "LL" and "Y" are vowels ,so you can say most of the Castillian
dialects have 7 vowels .
Every thing I write, wrote, or will write, its in my own opinion, for I have no other.
Release me from the duty of being polite and remind you, "I made use of my own brain".


Return to “General Language Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests