tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post2785122619837130555..comments2024-03-17T09:14:13.950+00:00Comments on John Wells’s phonetic blog: bunched/molar rJohn Wellshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13684304410735867148noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-1362901124972425712012-10-20T06:38:20.976+01:002012-10-20T06:38:20.976+01:00And what is the difference between a consonantal r...And what is the difference between a consonantal r and a syllabic r?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-16063285237703616472012-10-20T05:22:29.300+01:002012-10-20T05:22:29.300+01:00Could someone else post some audio files? The ones...Could someone else post some audio files? The ones that were posted are not working anymore.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-62325854959334470712011-03-12T17:59:42.915+00:002011-03-12T17:59:42.915+00:00did anyone can help me to complete my research pap...did anyone can help me to complete my research paper "approximants /r/" if anyone have information about r sound please tell me<br />thanx for allAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-23628924494064405172010-11-26T04:05:42.901+00:002010-11-26T04:05:42.901+00:00@Michael Barnes
The most recent appeal for a new s...@Michael Barnes<br />The most recent appeal for a new symbol ([A] for the vowel midway between [a] and [ɑ]) was in the form of a short article in JIPA by Bill Barry and J Trouvain in 2008.<br />I would suggest that those most interested in a new symbol who've posted here get together by email and put together a brief article and submit it to the JIPA editor (John Esling in UVic).<br />For those of us working with disordered speech a symbol would be most helpful - I think John Maidment's suggestion a good one, but various options could be put into the article.<br />I understand the IPA Council would make a decision on a new symbol assuming the JIPA article and subsequent discussion led to an agreed motion going to the council.<br /><br />Another way forward might be to stick with the current [ɹ] as a symbol for what is a single percept (or very nearly so), and use diacritics to distinguish the articulatory differences. So, the apical diacritic could be used to denote the apical postalveolar form, and a different one for the molar realization (ah, but which - there's the rub, there's no diacritic for dorsal - perhaps the diaresis to show centralized...)<br /><br />This of course opens the debate as to whether IPA symbols should be denoting auditory percepts or articulatory gestures?<br /><br />Looking forward to something in print on this - I'd be happy to help co-author if needed, with some insights from clinical phonetics.Martin J Ballhttp://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~mjb0372/mjball.htmlnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-18942315309269276092010-02-16T22:16:25.163+00:002010-02-16T22:16:25.163+00:00Looking at Pullum & Ladusaw's Phonetic Sym...Looking at Pullum & Ladusaw's <i>Phonetic Symbol Guide</i>, the reversed small capital R, [я], was proposed for a voiced bilabial trill, but is not used to represent any sound. The turned small capital R is not used either. I suppose we could always turn, invert, or reverse the fish-hook, [ɾ], as well. <br /><br />Is there any specified procedure to appeal to the International Phonetic Association for a new symbol?Michael J. Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05027076484661780110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-37177971922380037682010-02-13T02:15:59.527+00:002010-02-13T02:15:59.527+00:00Including me, but dementia has intervened. But as ...Including me, but dementia has intervened. But as far as I know я hasn't been adopted and the symbols mostly adopted in the areas of Arabic I had dealings with were various vague look alikes for `ayin, and what I have followed up is still in the same state.<br /><br />But of course epiglottal trill я must be. Much more appropriate in phonetics, obviously. But it does prove the point that the IPA doesn't seem to have any objections to using symbols from other alphabets with various degrees of inappropriateness with respect to their origins.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-16984935417789070882010-02-13T00:18:34.856+00:002010-02-13T00:18:34.856+00:00Some people use я for the epiglottal trill, though...Some people use я for the epiglottal trill, though.lukehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10967852565627690025noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-22570622363526795482010-02-12T17:51:22.195+00:002010-02-12T17:51:22.195+00:00But why on earth are we all picking holes in one a...But why on earth are we all picking holes in one another's suggestions when the most obvious ready-made stopgap is Cyrillic я? The IPA doesn't seem to have any objections to using symbols from other alphabets with various degrees of inappropriateness with respect to their origins.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-31956133554932772202010-02-12T17:25:31.782+00:002010-02-12T17:25:31.782+00:00Erik, if you don't mind the similarity of John...Erik, if you don't mind the similarity of John M's inverted-lower-case "r" to ʟ, what about another ready-made symbol: Cyrillic г? That has exactly the same relationship to the regular LC "r", and uncannily it too has a cursive form resembling a cursive "r"!mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-58117142973223029382010-02-11T10:35:17.459+00:002010-02-11T10:35:17.459+00:00Erik,
You were of course saying the same thing as ...Erik,<br />You were of course saying the same thing as John M. An inverted-lower-case "r" would be the same as taking the "turned-r" – the alveolar approximant symbol – and "flipping it on its vertical axis".<br /><br />I've been complaining about my eyesight over the past few days as an excuse for other misreadings. Just since having new lenses especially for the computer!<br /><br />When John M suggested<br />"If we really do need a new symbol for a bunched r, how about ɹ flipped about its vertical axis?"<br /><br />I somehow managed to trace the anaphora right back to the r, missing the ɹ completely, as you can see from the fact that I went on "to propose Cyrillic ч as a stopgap, for the same reason as I proposed wynn: it's readily available. Plus its cursive form looks like a copperplate form of r."<br /><br />I'd got fixated on that, and still prefer the r flipped about its vertical axis to the ɹ flipped likewise. Oh dear, it isn't in use already or something, is it?mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-57539244790775867052010-02-11T03:21:17.368+00:002010-02-11T03:21:17.368+00:00As a speech pathologist, I can contribute that we ...As a speech pathologist, I can contribute that we pick apart /r/. The consonant /r/ is always in the initial position of a word (foreign dialectal variations excluded here, for the sake of arugument). In the middle or end of words, the /r/ assimilates with the adjacent vowel(s) & is a unique sound in each environment (vocalic /r/, in our vocabulary).<br /><br />In working with apraxic kids (those who have a neurological impairment in motor planning), we have to isolate each example of how the /r/ occurs in a word: /er/, /or/, etc. If it's followed by another vowel (e.g. the word "barren"), it takes on a different life. Put another /r/ at the end of the word ("barer") and you have another set of variables. Add a triple whammy like "rarer" & you have a potential mess.<br /><br />I studied under Hilda Fisher at Northwestern in the mid-'70's & she had elaborate acoustic analyses of each of these. All different, but subtle. I fear these may have been lost in the intervening years, but I applaud the resurrection of the analysis. <br /><br />Hope this helps...<br />JanJan Potter Reednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-88907580004619681612010-02-11T02:35:17.957+00:002010-02-11T02:35:17.957+00:00John, there's a very good reason why this illu...John, there's a very good reason why this illustration from DJ's "Outline" is difficult (in addition to the fact you thought it wasn't applicable to your own non-apical articulation). His sagittal cross-sections look plausible and physiological at first sight, but they are not based on X-ray images. For example, only the black part of the tongue is deemed to move, the grey area below it is rigid and identical throughout the whole book. This rigid grey area includes the tongue root and epiglottal region. This is the very opposite of what happens in real speech, where there is as much movement down here as there is in the upper part of the mouth. In your recent "Glottal opera" blogg, you commented on how agile this area really is in speech (or singing at least): "Marvel how the epiglottis swings back and forth, sometimes obscuring the view of the vocal folds". DJ's illustrations are subjective impressions illustrating a theory of articulation he advocated. Sometimes they work, sometimes they don't. This one did not work for you. X-rayed apical articulations show the tongue blade stretched, with the tongue body withdrawn into the pharynx (where it would also obscure the view in a laryngoscope). DJ's illustration shows the tangue blade and apex too cramped.<br /><br />By the way my own English r is non-apical too, I had to wait a further 40 numbered paragraphs before he got round to it.Sidney Woodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01138711082469220983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-51919256438073636382010-02-10T22:09:00.230+00:002010-02-10T22:09:00.230+00:00Oh, it was mentioned that samples would be nice, I...Oh, it was mentioned that samples would be nice, I loaded a few to my server space. The first one is a speaker from Oklahoma. The second two are from Michigan. <br /><br />1. http://vocal-ease.net/files/patillo.mp3<br />2. http://vocal-ease.net/files/michigan1.mp3<br />3. http://vocal-ease.net/files/michigan2.mp3<br /><br />All three of these speakers make their consonant R sound is a molar/pharyngeal sound. The Oklahoma speaker, for the most part, makes is vowels with enough approximation to classify it as a consonant. The other two make some distinction between them.Michael J. Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05027076484661780110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-35285314659787985152010-02-10T21:34:34.645+00:002010-02-10T21:34:34.645+00:00I certainly agree with Michael that the important ...I certainly agree with Michael that the important thing here is that we get a symbol. It certainly doesn't matter terribly much what the symbol is. However, since we're talking about it...<br /><br />@mallamb<br /><br />>Are you saying inverted as opposed to John M's flipped? If so why? Wouldn't that look even more like ʟ than my ad-hoc existing symbols look like anything inappropriate?<br /><br />I thought I was saying the same thing as John M. An inverted-lower-case "r" would be the same as taking the "turned-r" – the alveolar approximant symbol – and "flipping it on its vertical axis," which is, I believe what John M suggested. Have I got something wrong? Yes, it could be confused with lower-case capital "L", but this seem no closer than many of the other IPA symbols that have that problem. I do still prefer the anchor, but the main thing here is to get a symbol, whatever it is. (One other reason I prefer the anchor to the inverted-r is that it is one step further removed from a recognizable consonant symbol. We would, I imagine, be using the new symbol as *both* consonant and vowel, so it should be something that doesn't look too much like one or the other. I think the anchor serves that purpose.)<br /><br />>And the wings are going to inflate the coding requirements even more, whether they are diacritics or form extra symbols. Degrees of bracing seem more like the sort of thing to handle in definitions for specific dialects etc.<br /><br />I hadn't thought of that. I know nothing of coding requirements, but that makes sense. Ah well. As I said, though, the main thing is to get a symbol recognized. I do think that, ideally, we would be able to indicate degrees of bracing whether with diacritics or modifications to the symbol itself, rather than just addressing it in notes. The same speaker will often use different degrees of bracing within the same utterance. When you're jonesin' for precision… (with thanks to Phil Thompson, whose phrase that is.)Erik Singerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07849388573705597836noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-33611128997270371762010-02-10T21:22:18.771+00:002010-02-10T21:22:18.771+00:00Well, first, I suppose I should admit to being the...Well, first, I suppose I should admit to being the "Michael" that is mentioned in John's original posting. <br /><br />I think that the discussion here is great. I'm glad I finally got a chance to pop over to read it. <br /><br />The Southern "R" that is mentioned is definitely a molar-R. As I stated in the postings on VASTAvox, I certainly grew up making this R sound, which--I believe--for much of that state and Texas actually pulls further back than the molars. Honestly, I would venture to say that the bulk of speakers in the US naturally move toward this molar-R sound. Some of the areas where I hear the molar/pharyngeal R sound are through the upper midwest, California, the plains states, and--as we said--much of the South. Also, I would agree that almost every American uses this sound following the /k/ and /g/ phonemes. <br /><br />In my classes with actors, I teach them the variations between the phonemes here, indicating that many people use the tip of the tongue, many use a retroflex placement, and many use this molar sound. I do speak of the fact that there is no clear symbol for the final sound. I will say that--trying to give them something to use--I have taken to using the /ɰ/ symbol with diacritics for raising and retraction. When doing this, I explain that I am probably the only person they will find using this phonetic indication, but I want some way to communicate with them when I'm giving them notes. I will admit that I do encourage them to integrate the production of the /ɹ/ into their every day speech, however. I think that it aids in their being able to bring more linguistic detail to their speech and I think it actually helps them to obtain healthier vocal placement. <br /><br />Though much of the US comes close to making the consonant and the rhotic vowel much the same way, most of the country can make distinctions between the vowel and the consonant. However, the consonant retraction can often prevent a distinction if moving into the vowel (what would be [_.ɹə˞]. A prime example of this is our previous president's inability to pronounce the word "terror." He effectively made it a homonym with the word "tear." (I used to joke about our war on ripping paper). <br /><br />Depending on the amount of retraction into the pharynx or the height of the apex of rear of the tongue, one will hear variations to this sound, but these could be identified with diacritics around. Honestly, I don't care what the glyph is that we use for the sound, as long as we have one. I would be game for anything from the ones mentioned here to simply a reversed upper or lower case R. The IPA has certainly turned the e every way possible. They can't even seem to figure out which way the closed Epsilon should face--it is different on different revisions of the chart. <br /><br />So, rather than all of us giving proposals for a symbol, it seems we should figure out a way to request that the International Phonetic Association recognize a symbol for us.Michael J. Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05027076484661780110noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-8232670813820211762010-02-10T11:08:38.086+00:002010-02-10T11:08:38.086+00:00Amy, we're two hoots, and that's how much ...Amy, we're two hoots, and that's how much we don't care what fools we make of ourselves.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-14844520080757882602010-02-10T03:49:17.063+00:002010-02-10T03:49:17.063+00:00@mallamb: You're a hoot. And of course, I did ...@mallamb: You're a hoot. And of course, I did say that I preferred Erik's solution to my own. I had to look up sulcalized, by the way. Does this mean that sulky = groovy?Amy Stollerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14067839246823753590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-24204967073025885072010-02-10T02:17:51.610+00:002010-02-10T02:17:51.610+00:00I guess I should have said that the Southern r-col...I guess I should have said that the Southern r-colored vowel sounds different than how it sounds in other regions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-49322787216973380742010-02-10T01:21:55.103+00:002010-02-10T01:21:55.103+00:00@Erik
As a native American Southerner, who uses t...@Erik<br /><br />As a native American Southerner, who uses the bunched/molar r naturally and natively, and as a burgeoning phonetician/phonologist, I do not hear a difference in the sound of your alveolar and bunched r's. It could be my computers speakers, or my headphones.<br /><br />@mallamb<br />It does look like a p, deal with it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-67725036282947847452010-02-10T00:03:01.909+00:002010-02-10T00:03:01.909+00:00Erik, an invaluable exegesis from the horse's ...Erik, an invaluable exegesis from the horse's mouth.<br /><br />> <i>An inverted-r would be fine by me</i><br /><br />Are you saying inverted as opposed to John M's flipped? If so why? Wouldn't that look even more like ʟ than my ad-hoc existing symbols look like anything inappropriate?<br /><br />And the wings are going to inflate the coding requirements even more, whether they are diacritics or form extra symbols. Degrees of bracing seem more like the sort of thing to handle in definitions for specific dialects etc.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-21519709304003527412010-02-09T23:00:52.370+00:002010-02-09T23:00:52.370+00:00At last, I can chime on this -- I've haven'...At last, I can chime on this -- I've haven't had a chance to sit down with a mike or even an internet connection since this was posted. First of all, thank you, John, for picking up this subject and opening the debate. And thank you also for posting my suggested symbol as a possible one for this purpose. I'm honored.<br /><br />As for your request for sound files, here's one of me reading the same phrase twice, first with an apical-alveolar /r/ and then with a bunched or molar /r/. If I have time tomorrow I will search for examples of other speakers, but this might do for now.<br /><br />http://tiny.cc/hWvYS<br /><br /> I believe that: 1. there is an audible difference between the two, if not an enormous one, and 2. I am not doing any secondary articulations along with the bunched /r/. As has been discussed, this is often found with some pharyngealization, but I don't believe that has to be the case. I welcome correction on this from sharper ears than mine, but I think all I've changed is the placement of the /r/, from apical-alveolar to "molar."<br /><br />@John Maidment<br /><br />An inverted-r would be fine by me, though I do think that my symbol (which we might call "the anchor," both for its resemblance to one and for the nautical/piratical associations) would be easier for students to keep separate from the turned-r. Another possible advantage is that the symbol could be modified to indicate the degree of bracing. A second rightward-stretching wing could be added at the mid-level of the symbol to indicate moderate bracing, and a third at the top to indicate pronounced bracing, a la Oklahoma, Texas, etc. This may be a bit fussy to write, but then one would only need to do so when one needed a lot of detail in the transcription -- that can get somewhat cluttered anyway. The basic symbol I don't find hard to write at all, whether on a blackboard or on paper. My students have been using it happily for two years, even though I tell them no one outsided of my class will ever know what they mean by it!<br /><br />The basic problem, as I see it, is that many Americans use this articulation both word-initially and post-vocalically. As things currently stand, we have to use two different symbols for this -- a turned-r for the first and a vowel with rhoticity for the second. This would seem to violate the basic principle of one action, one symbol. Plus, as has been mentioned, it bothers us American voice, speech & accent teachers to have to use a symbol that is so inaccurate.Erik Singernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-74952901326968433102010-02-09T22:42:00.965+00:002010-02-09T22:42:00.965+00:00You'd think when I said just then that I had b...You'd think when I said just then that I had been thinking along the same lines I would have remembered I was going to propose Cyrillic ч as a stopgap, for the same reason as I proposed wynn: it's readily available. Plus its cursive form looks like a copperplate form of r.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-71472335313143319902010-02-09T19:53:56.292+00:002010-02-09T19:53:56.292+00:00No, 'pretty easy to right' is fine. Even i...No, 'pretty easy to right' is fine. Even if not for mirror-righters! I had been thinking along the same lines. The inverted ramshorn affair looks pretty overspecified to me.mallambhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07086916400059545681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-82649780840601139122010-02-09T19:12:35.191+00:002010-02-09T19:12:35.191+00:00ooops it's pretty easy...ooops it's pretty easy...John Maidmenthttp://blogjam.name/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-377103124456226005.post-40586115969573125032010-02-09T19:11:22.702+00:002010-02-09T19:11:22.702+00:00John,
Do you have a retracted plosive in /tr/ and...John,<br /><br />Do you have a retracted plosive in /tr/ and /dr/clusters?<br /><br />If we really do need a new symbol for a bunched r, how about ɹ flipped about its vertical axis? It looks like an "r" symbol, and its pretty easy to right and shouldn't cause any headaches for font designers.John Maidmenthttp://blogjam.name/noreply@blogger.com