Pronunciação do português brasileiro

[mōdgethanc]

Disclaimer: I am new to the Portuguese language. Before I begin studying it in earnest, I'd like to make sure I'm pronouncing it correctly.

Here is what I imagine to be a rendition of the following passage in a fairly typical Brazilian accent (São Paulo, Minas Gerais):

Todos os seres humanos nascem livres e iguais em dignidade e direitos. São dotados de razão e consciência e devem agir em relação uns aos outros com espírito de fraternidade.

[ˈt̪od̪ʊs ʊs ˈsɛɾɪs ũˈmɐ̃nʊs ˈnasẽɪ̃ ˈlivɾɪs iˈɡwaɪ̯s ẽ dʒiɡniˈd̪adʒɪ ɪ dʒiˈɾeit̪us | sɐ̃ʊ̃ d̪oˈt̪ad̪ʊs dʒɪ xaˈzɐ̃ʊ̃ i kõˈsjẽsjɐ ɪ ˈd̪ɛvẽɪ̃ aˈʒiɾ ẽ xelaˈsɐ̃ʊ̃ ũs aʊ̯s ˈoʊ̯t̪ɾʊs kõ ɛsˈpiɾit̪ʊ dʒɪ fɾat̪eɾniˈd̪adʒɪ]

Am I close? One thing that confuses me is that I can't be sure when <e, o> are pronounced open (é, ó) or closed (ê, ô) when the accents aren't used.

[Partisan]

Disclaimer: I am new to the Portuguese language. Before I begin studying it in earnest, I'd like to make sure I'm pronouncing it correctly.

Here is what I imagine to be a rendition of the following passage in a fairly typical Brazilian accent (São Paulo, Minas Gerais):

Todos os seres humanos nascem livres e iguais em dignidade e direitos. São dotados de razão e consciência e devem agir em relação uns aos outros com espírito de fraternidade.

[ˈt̪od̪ʊs ʊs ˈsɛɾɪs ũˈmɐ̃nʊs ˈnasẽɪ̃ ˈlivɾɪs iˈɡwaɪ̯s ẽ dʒiɡniˈd̪adʒɪ ɪ dʒiˈɾeit̪us | sɐ̃ʊ̃ d̪oˈt̪ad̪ʊs dʒɪ xaˈzɐ̃ʊ̃ i kõˈsjẽsjɐ ɪ ˈd̪ɛvẽɪ̃ aˈʒiɾ ẽ xelaˈsɐ̃ʊ̃ ũs aʊ̯s ˈoʊ̯t̪ɾʊs kõ ɛsˈpiɾit̪ʊ dʒɪ fɾat̪eɾniˈd̪adʒɪ]

Am I close? One thing that confuses me is that I can't be sure when <e, o> are pronounced open (é, ó) or closed (ê, ô) when the accents aren't used.

It's variable, in accents from São Paulo and Minas Gerais, the tendence is the "e" and "o" appear closed, but in accents from brazilian northeast, the tendence is the "e" and "o" appear open.

But it's happen in all syllabes except the last. In case of last syllabe, "e" and "o" (both when weak syllabes) sound like "i" and "u".

[algorrém]

Am I close? One thing that confuses me is that I can't be sure when <e, o> are pronounced open (é, ó) or closed (ê, ô) when the accents aren't used.

I don't have much of a clue about how people from São Paulo or Minas would pronounce it (and I think there's significant variation inside those states), but yeah, you seem to be close enough. Here are a few observations: when a final -s is followed by a vowel, it turns into a z, so it should be [ˈt̪od̪ʊzʊs], and so on. 'Seres' and 'espírito' have closed ee. The u is not nasalized in 'humano'. And I think 'com' sounds more natural as [kũ], but paulistas and mineiros might disagree, I'm not sure how they pronounce it.

About the open and closed vowels, I'm afraid there's no general rule, you just have to memorize them. There are some special rules, though, such as in nouns derived from verbs the verb is open and the noun is closed. For instance: 'o arremesso' (both ee are closed) and 'eu arremesso' (the second e is open), 'o porto' (both oo are closed) and 'eu porto' (the first o is open). In former orthography there were plenty of accents marking the open/closedness of the vowels, but not anymore (maybe you can look up some books with orthography from the 40s-70s). And, as Partisan said, there are two major dialectal groups in Brazil, one to the Center-South that tends to close the vowels and one to the Northeast which tends to open them. Anyway, messing them up is not a big deal most of the times, since many of them are dialect-dependent, so there's no need to worry about it.

But it's happen in all syllabes except the last. In case of last syllabe, "e" and "o" (both when weak syllabes) sound like "i" and "u".

Actually, this also depends on dialect. In some places in the South, and I think also in places in the São Paulo interior and perhaps elsewhere in the Center-South, those final e and o are in general not reduced to i and u.

[mōdgethanc]

Here's my new attempt:

[ˈt̪od̪uz uz ˈseɾiz uˈmɐnus ˈnasẽĩ̯ ˈlivɾiz i iˈɡwai̯s ẽ d̪iɡniˈd̪ad̪i i d̪iˈɾei̯t̪us | sɐ̃ũ̯ d̪oˈt̪ad̪us d̪i xaˈzɐ̃u̯ i kõˈsjẽsjɐ i ˈd̪ɛvẽĩ̯ aˈʒiɾ ẽ xelaˈsɐ̃u̯ ũs au̯s ˈou̯t̪ɾus kõ esˈpiɾit̪u d̪i fɾat̪eɾniˈd̪ad̪i]

Does this sound natural to you? Is it reasonably close to how you, or other Brazilian people would pronounce it?

Actually, this also depends on dialect. In some places in the South, and I think also in places in the São Paulo interior and perhaps elsewhere in the Center-South, those final e and o are in general not reduced to i and u.

Really? I thought this occured in every Portuguese dialect, although the reduction isn't as commonplace in BP as it is in EP.

[Partisan]

Here's my new attempt:

[ˈt̪od̪uz uz ˈseɾiz uˈmɐnus ˈnasẽĩ̯ ˈlivɾiz i iˈɡwai̯s ẽ d̪iɡniˈd̪ad̪i i d̪iˈɾei̯t̪us | sɐ̃ũ̯ d̪oˈt̪ad̪us d̪i xaˈzɐ̃u̯ i kõˈsjẽsjɐ i ˈd̪ɛvẽĩ̯ aˈʒiɾ ẽ xelaˈsɐ̃u̯ ũs au̯s ˈou̯t̪ɾus kõ esˈpiɾit̪u d̪i fɾat̪eɾniˈd̪ad̪i]

Does this sound natural to you? Is it reasonably close to how you, or other Brazilian people would pronounce it?

Actually, this also depends on dialect. In some places in the South, and I think also in places in the São Paulo interior and perhaps elsewhere in the Center-South, those final e and o are in general not reduced to i and u.

Really? I thought this occured in every Portuguese dialect, although the reduction isn't as commonplace in BP as it is in EP.

The reductions are more strong in EP and envolves all syllabes except the strong. In BP, it's basicly in the last syllabe, when weak.

[Rivaldo]

you are writing in egyptian hyeogliphs? hahah joking, but i can't read that :/

About the open vowels, in belo horizonte(capital) and north of minas, so as in goiás for example, the 'northeast' open vowels are also very common. but i'm from south of minas, so i dont speak this way, its so beautiful

[Luís]

Any particular reason for transcribing "em" as a monophthong?

[Psi-Lord]

I often have a really hard time both at judging what might be considering standard in BP and at employing really narrow Portuguese transcriptions, but I’ll throw in my 10¢, if I may.

[ˈt̪od̪uz uz ˈseɾiz uˈmɐnus ˈnasẽĩ̯ ˈlivɾiz i iˈɡwai̯s ẽ d̪iɡniˈd̪ad̪i i d̪iˈɾei̯t̪us | sɐ̃ũ̯ d̪oˈt̪ad̪us d̪i xaˈzɐ̃u̯ i kõˈsjẽsjɐ i ˈd̪ɛvẽĩ̯ aˈʒiɾ ẽ xelaˈsɐ̃u̯ ũs au̯s ˈou̯t̪ɾus kõ esˈpiɾit̪u d̪i fɾat̪eɾniˈd̪ad̪i]

In [uz ˈseɾiz], you’d actually have [us ˈseɾiz] (or perhaps [u ˈseɾiz]), but you did get it right in your first transcription, so this might be just a typo.

In my running speech, my em is definitely more like along the lines of [ĩ] ~ [i͠j], which I believe is what Luís had in mind above, too. My espírito is also [isˈpiɾit̪u].

I have the feeling I pronounce consciência more like [kõsiˈẽsjɐ], but my careful speech might be fooling me.

And then, there’s is the issue with the [tʃ] and [dʒ], which you did use in your first transcription, but dropped in the second one. This, however, as it was probably pointed out, is a matter of regional variation even e.g. within the state of São Paulo itself.

The best attempt I’ve seen to describe the phonology of both EP and BP can be found in Nova Gramática do Português Contemporâneo, by Celso Cunha and Lindley Cintra, which is perhaps the only grammar book I know written for both Portuguese and Brazilians. I might try and quote part of its chapter on phonetics and phonology here, if you want.

[mōdgethanc]

Thanks for your help, Psi-Lord.

Any particular reason for transcribing "em" as a monophthong?

It's not? I thought-am/-em were diphthongs only at the end of words.

And then, there’s is the issue with the [tʃ] and [dʒ], which you did use in your first transcription, but dropped in the second one. This, however, as it was probably pointed out, is a matter of regional variation even e.g. within the state of São Paulo itself.

How common is it in general? Because I don't really like the affrication myself.

[Psi-Lord]

Any particular reason for transcribing "em" as a monophthong?

It's not? I thought-am/-em were diphthongs only at the end of words.

I’d say you’re right (although I think certain Brazilian variants may have diphthongs in other positions, which sounds a bit annoying to my ears). However, I think em being an unstressed monosyllabic word makes it equally prone to diphthongisation.

And then, there’s is the issue with the [tʃ] and [dʒ], which you did use in your first transcription, but dropped in the second one. This, however, as it was probably pointed out, is a matter of regional variation even e.g. within the state of São Paulo itself.

How common is it in general? Because I don't really like the affrication myself.

Honestly, I’m not sure. The major problem with Brazilian Portuguese is that, as far as I can tell, there have never been detailed studies on its variants, not even regionally. Even my grammar books provide little to no information on such geographical distributions. Based on my personal experience, though, I can say such affrication is the norm in the states of São Paulo and Rio de Janeiro (although pockets of [ti] and [di] do exist), and it’s very widespread in the states of Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso do Sul and Goiás, and in the north and north-west of Paraná.

[Psi-Lord]

By the way, an interesting point that the authors of that grammar book I mentioned previously. They actually distinguish three allophones of /ti/ and /di/ in Brazilian Portuguese: besides [ti] and [di], they give [tʲi] and [dʲi], which would be the most widespread, and the standard in São Paulo and Rio, and [tʃ] and [dʒ] proper, which would be typical of the colloquial, everyday usage of Rio only.

This somewhat reminds me of a curious thing – I’ve had Serbian speakers, for instance, tell me that, to their ears, Brazilian /ti/ and /di/ (or at least mine, more specifically) sound closer to their ć and đ (/tɕ/ and /dʑ/) than to their č and dž (tʃ// and /dʒ/).

[Æren]

This somewhat reminds me of a curious thing – I’ve had Serbian speakers, for instance, tell me that, to their ears, Brazilian /ti/ and /di/ (or at least mine, more specifically) sound closer to their ć and đ (/tɕ/ and /dʑ/) than to their č and dž (tʃ// and /dʒ/).

Me too

[linguopolitano]

This somewhat reminds me of a curious thing – I’ve had Serbian speakers, for instance, tell me that, to their ears, Brazilian /ti/ and /di/ (or at least mine, more specifically) sound closer to their ć and đ (/tɕ/ and /dʑ/) than to their č and dž (tʃ// and /dʒ/).

Exactly! I think that the most widespread Brazilian /ti/ and /di/ pronunciation is /tɕ/ and /dʑ/, i.e. the same as the pronunciation of Serbian letters "ć" and "đ". This is what I heard in São Paulo (in the capital, but also in some areas of the state), parts of Paraná, Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo, Bahia etc. What I heard (and adopted in the pronunciation of my Portuguese)in the popular speech of the city of Rio de Janeiro (I lived there and had the opportunity to observe the dialect minutely) is something between /tɕ/ / /dʑ/ and /tʃ// / /dʒ/, i.e. the sound which is not our "ć"/"đ", nor "č"/"dž". It is something in between that reminds me of one sound which can be heard in some areas of Croatian language (e.g. in Zagreb). They don't distinguish "č" and "ć" (or "dž" and "đ") in spoken language. Their realization of these letters is something in between. Maybe I am wrong, but I think the same sound is the popular carioca pronunciation of /ti/ and /di/.

[mōdgethanc]

Interesting. I thought most Brazilians just had [tʃ] and [dʒ] there, except for a few who retained [ti] and [di]. So would you say this pronounciation (with [tʃ] and [dʒ], not their palatalized equivalents) is more of a Carioca feature, like realizing /s/ and /z/ as [ʃ] and [ʒ] in the syllable coda?

[linguopolitano]

Interesting. I thought most Brazilians just had [tʃ] and [dʒ] there, except for a few who retained [ti] and [di]. So would you say this pronounciation (with [tʃ] and [dʒ], not their palatalized equivalents) is more of a Carioca feature, like realizing /s/ and /z/ as [ʃ] and [ʒ] in the syllable coda?

I definitely have the impression that the palatalization in Carioca dialect (the popular speech of the city of Rio de Janeiro) is different, as I described above. I think that some kind of palatalization also occurs with groups /ni/ and /li/, but it is more like secondary palatalization then real assimilation process.
As far as I think, the phonemes /s/ and /z/ in syllable coda are realized as [ ɕ] , not [ʃ] (in front of a voiceless consonant) and [ʑ], not [ʒ] (in front of a voiced consonant) in Carioca dialect.

[mōdgethanc]

I have never seen that transcription before. Is that just the way they sound to you? Because as far as I know Serbian doesn't have those phonemes.

[linguopolitano]

Standard Serbian has /tʃ/ and /dʒ/ (as phonemes represented with the letters "č" and "dž") and /tɕ/ and /dʑ / (as phonemes represented with the letters "ć" and "đ"). My impression is that most of Brazilian dialects have the alophones [tɕ] and [dʑ ] as the realization of /ti/ and /di/, only the popular speech of the city of Rio de Janeiro has other alophones in those contexts. They are something between [tɕ] and [dʑ ] and [tʃ] and [dʒ]. My impressions are shared by many Brazilians and some of them are linguists. However, a detailed research is needed to confirm them.
Standard Serbian doesn't have / ɕ/ and /ʑ/, so I am not comparing the pronunciation of /s/ and /z/ in syllable coda in Carioca dialect to Serbian pronunciation (like I did in the case of palatalization of /ti/ and /di/). I just think that these syllable codas in the informal speech of Cariocas (mostly young population) are realized as [ ɕ] and [ʑ], not as [ʃ] and [ʒ] like in European Portuguese. When I compare the "chiamento carioca" to one of European Portuguese, I see some slight difference. The alophones of Cariocas in these contexts seem to be more like alveo-palatal fricatives ( ɕ and ʑ) then alveolar fricatives (ʃ and ʒ). These differences are not mentioned in Brazilian (or Portuguese) grammars but I think we just can hear them comparing the speech of some Portuguese to the informal speech of some (younger) Cariocas.

[mōdgethanc]

That's an awfully fine distinction to make. I doubt laymen could hear it.

[Michael]

I myself found Portuguese a pain in the tuchus to pronounce correctly (esp. the European variety) but ever since I've shifted to the Brazilian variety 3 months ago I have found it a joy; the specific Brazilian accent I'm learning is Carioca from Rio...or at least similar to the accent Fafá de Belém speaks/sings in

We have a Brazilian friend Jacinta from Porto Alegre, and I am now a little mystified at how different Brazilian Portuguese is between cities. She does not soften final -z like Carioca speakers from Rio (which is near Rio I believe), and I do not think I heard her soften final -s once; but when I speak to her again I'll observe her accent when we speak. It could have been that I was so intent on trying to understand everything she said instead of calm my mind down

I have built up my own little unique Brazilian accent, pretty much from Carioca pronunciation (I hope), and here is a sample of it:

"Ele estava correndo demais rápido e por isso se caiu no chão."
He was running too fast therefore he fell on the floor.
ɛl iʃtavɑ koʀẽⁿdu dʒɪmajʃ ʀaˈpidu i puriˈsu sɪ kaiːu nu ʃɛ̃ũ

[BlackZ]

Hello Michael.

Just for comparation, I would pronounce [elis'tavɐ ko'xẽⁿdu 'xapidu dʒɪ'majz i pu'risu ka'iu nu ʃɐ̃ũ] (Ele estava correndo rápido demais e por isso caiu no chão) - my dialect is... well, I really don't know if it has an "official" name. I just call it "Santista" - which is spoken in and around Santos.

As the others said, there are lots of variations in BP, so it's quite hard to point a "Standard" one.

About your pronounciation, there's some chance I would understand "Ela" [ɛlɐ] instead of "Ele" [eli] and I don't think I would understand [ʃẽũ] easily

By the way, each region has a different pronounciation for "rr" (and "r" in the beginning of the word) - [ʀ] Carioca, [r] Paulistano, [ɹ] Paulista, and many others.