This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
"In English the sound is labialized, [ʒʷ], although few transcriptions bother with this level of detail."
Labialised? I don't labialise mine. This might be a (Australian) dialect thing, but I doubt it. Questioned. 150.203.2.85 06:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)Willjsteed150.203.2.8506:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My introductory phonetics book says that all postalveolar consonants and [ɹ] are always rounded in English, same goes for French. My guess is that for [ʒ] this is not as noticeable because the consonant is quite rare in English, especially word-initially. --Chlämens (talk) 22:28, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If you are going to delete the note about Russian (which seeks to clarify a common misunderstanding), you might as well delete the "Note" subsection header as well. But I think it is a net loss of information. --Ziusudra17:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Asia: This is not a good example to use for a voiced postalveolar fricative in English as many English people pronounce this word with a voiceless postalveolar fricative! Eroica16:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is it worth noting that there really isn't a letter in the alphabet that would typically represent this sound. Its sound is pretty sporadic in words like vision, treasure, fissure, garage, genre, mirage, measure, seizure, luxurious, Beijing. --Moop ſtick | (Talk)04:07, 10 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Even though the Russian letter <Ж> sounds like a Voiced retroflex fricative, in many dialects in major cities (especially in Moscow, St. Petersburg, etc.) it is a Voiced postalveolar fricative.
Here are the features of a Voiced postalveolar fricative:
Its manner of articulation is fricative, vvhich means it is produced by constricting air flovv through a narrovv channel at the place of articulation, causing turbulence.
Its place of articulation is postalveolar vvhich means it is articulated vvith the tip of the tongue betvveen the alveolar ridge and the palate, but closer to the alveolar ridge than for alveolo-palatal consonants.
Its phonation type is voiced, vvhich means the vocal cords are vibrating during the articulation.
It is an oral consonant, vvhich means air is allovved to escape through the mouth.
It is a central consonant, vvhich means it is produced by allovving the airstream to flovv over the middle of the tongue, rather than the sides.
The airstream mechanism is pulmonic egressive, vvhich means it is articulated by pushing air out of the lungs and through the vocal tract, rather than from the glottis or the mouth.
This includes many features in the letter Ж. So, vvhy is the Russian letter Ж classified ONLY in the phonology category of a Voiced retroflex fricative and not also in the category of a Voiced postalveolar fricative? There is a vvebsite that allovvs native speakers from their native countries to pronounce words (letters in this case) in fluent Russian, and here is "Zhe" (transliterised as either <žɛ>/<ʒɛ>, or in the case of a Voiced retroflex fricative: <ʐɛ>):
Please, If it is possible to consider BOTH VVIDELY KNOVVN DIALECTS OF RUSSIAN (Both vvhich are considered official to the USSR [Soviet Union] novv knovvn as the Russian Federation.) Thank you. :D
People generally transcribe it as if it's palatoalveolar. I suspect the retroflexion is not well understood, though it is widely attested. If you find a source that talks about dialectal variation in Russian postalveolar fricatives between retroflex and palatoalveolar pronunciations, that's welcome here and at Russian phonology. I'm skeptical, though; all the sound files you've provided sound fairly retroflex to my ears. — Ƶ§œš¹[aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi]01:06, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It sounds fine. Please note that IPA symbols are not ment to represent exact sounds, the variation in sounds is virtually infinite so it's not possible or useful to create a symbol for each precise sound. IPA simply gives enough symbols to write down any language, but the precise sounds represented by them may differ from language to language.--90.179.235.249 (talk) 01:37, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Incorrect, the sound sample is not within your "infinite" possibilities to pronounce ʒ; The sample is more palatalized, which can be represented by a different IPA symbol (ʑ or ʒʲ (that article and this one could use a switch of sound samples)). It is indeed the wrong sound. A similar problem is with the word examples that have been used for English. Many speakers pronounce words like "Asia" and "vision" (and even "leisure") with the palatalized sound. Something like "Genre" would be ideal.NotDomo (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm trying to figure out a proper phonetics code for MM's name. Having 2 examples for his first which sounds the same seems like a good start. The "J'onnz" in live-action sounds pretty much like 'Jones' to me but J'onn sounds different enough from John (more like how French pronounce Jean) that it seems worth noting. 184.145.18.50 (talk) 09:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia article on Maltese mentions this sound as being part of the language, so I clicked on the letter to get here - but Maltese isn't listed as one of the languages that contains it. Both articles can't be right.213.127.210.95 (talk) 18:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's no inconsistency, as the aim of this article isn't to list every single language that contains this sound; it also doesn't say that Maltese doesn't contain it. Mr KEBAB (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have just modified one external link on Voiced palato-alveolar sibilant. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
