Characterization of proper /ç/
-
- Lebom
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 11:22 am
- احمکي ارش-ھجن
- Avisaru
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 12:45 pm
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
I always considered it an sh-like sound, but it would be better to describe it like a /hj/ sound or the tongue closer to the roof of the mouth more than /j/ and without vibrating the thraot/h-like.
ʾAšol ḵavad pulqam ʾifbižen lav ʾifšimeḻ lit maseḡrad lav lit n͛ubad. ʾUpulasim ṗal sa-panžun lav sa-ḥadṇ lav ṗal šarmaḵeš lit ʾaẏṭ waẏyadanun wižqanam.
- Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
- Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
Yes, I've always tried to pronounce it as /hj/ as in English huge (for people who don't simplify this cluster to /j/) or voiceless [j]; while technically it isn't, I think it's similar to how people impressionistically describe [ɬ] as voiceless /l/ (even though technically it isn't). When people try to pronounce voiceless equivalents to voiced approximants, there's a tendency to use more friction I think.
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
I don't think it's like [ʃ] at all. You're probably thinking of the replacement of [ç] by [ʃ] in some dialects of German.
My suggestion, based on Catford, is to pronounce and stop voicing. You should get a fricative (pretty much what people are saying with [hj]). Then raise your tongue very slightly to increase the fricative quality, and you've got [ç].
My suggestion, based on Catford, is to pronounce and stop voicing. You should get a fricative (pretty much what people are saying with [hj]). Then raise your tongue very slightly to increase the fricative quality, and you've got [ç].
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
When I'm tutoring German, I typically have people start with "Hugh". Once they have the sound isolated, I work on moving it to the end of a word.Sumelic wrote:Yes, I've always tried to pronounce it as /hj/ as in English huge (for people who don't simplify this cluster to /j/) or voiceless [j]
- ˈd̪ʲɛ.gɔ kɾuˑl̪
- Avisaru
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 11:11 pm
- Location: Łódź
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
I have an impression German /ç/ sounds like my, Polish, /ɕ/, more than any Asian /ɕ/'s, which to me are either [sʲ] or [ʃ]. Is just our /ɕ/ even more palatal and that's why German /ç/, when distinguished from /x/, is taught to be /ɕ/?
In Budapest:
- Hey mate, are you hung-a-ry?
- Hey mate, are you hung-a-ry?
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
Honestly, in the context of Asian languages, I'm usually skeptical that they have /ɕ/ rather than just /ʃ/. However, have you ever heard /ɕ/ in Malayalam?
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
I had heard claims that some Americans had [ç] for /ʃ/. I only half-believed it until a few days ago when I was transcribing an interview, and the interviewee had this feature. I thought she was saying he until I discovered the antecedent of her pronoun was female, and she was in fact saying [çi]. This is the only word, however, where I noticed this; in other contexts it sounded like [ʃ]--but she pronounced she with [ç] consistently.
"But if of ships I now should sing, what ship would come to me,
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
What ship would bear me ever back across so wide a Sea?”
- ˈd̪ʲɛ.gɔ kɾuˑl̪
- Avisaru
- Posts: 255
- Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 11:11 pm
- Location: Łódź
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
I started searching for pronunciation guides right after seeing your post . It sounds very /ɕ/-like, but I think Polish sound is more soft than yours.Vijay wrote:However, have you ever heard /ɕ/ in Malayalam?
In Budapest:
- Hey mate, are you hung-a-ry?
- Hey mate, are you hung-a-ry?
- WeepingElf
- Smeric
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 5:00 pm
- Location: Braunschweig, Germany
- Contact:
Re: Characterization of proper /ç/
As a native speaker of German, I can assure that [ç] is quite different from [ʃ], and also quite different from [ɕ]. Sumelic was not too far off the mark in characterizing it as a voiceless [j], but it has a little more constriction - it is a palatal non-sibilant fricative, while [j] is an approximant.
...brought to you by the Weeping Elf
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A
Tha cvastam émi cvastam santham amal phelsa. -- Friedrich Schiller
ESTAR-3SG:P human-OBJ only human-OBJ true-OBJ REL-LOC play-3SG:A