Talk:Voiceless uvular plosive

	Linguistics portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

Inuktitut contradiction

The example of [ihipɢiuqtuq] in Inuktitut contradicts the Voiced uvular plosive article (where it is given as [ihipɢeoqtoq]). Mo-Al 23:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't, though. In Inuktitut, the short phonemes /i/ and /u/ (as opposed to long, /iː/ and /uː/) may be realized as /e/ and /o/, respectively (or /ɛ/ and /ɔ/, respectively). Please see the article on the Inuktitut language (to which you linked), it states this.--Cyningaenglisc 02:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but it doesn't say when they are realized as that. If they are completely interchangeable, then it would make more sense to give a phonemic description rather than a phonetic one in these articles. Mo-Al 05:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - As I understand it, /i/ and /u/ are realized as [e] and [o] when they're adjacent to uvular sounds. —An gr 13:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a contradiction, but I can imagine how it is very confusing to readers. Both sounds are uvular stops and the same example, a word that has both sounds, is used. Perhaps changing the example word in one of the pages would be appropriate. Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is the vowels though - nowhere is it stated when /i/ and /u/ are allophonically realized as [e] and [o], so unless they are in free variation (which there does not seem to be a source for currently) the pages are still in contradiction. Mo-Al 04:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The two articles don't contradict anymore because they have the exact same word transcribed exactly the same. I fixed it almost a month ago and if someone decides that the [e] [o] thing ought to be reflected in the transcription then they can change both. Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 11:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay, but I'm going to make it a phonemic, not phonetic, description with slashes. Mo-Al 19:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. Æµ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 19:34, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No [q] in Avar

The Avar language doesn't have the fortis stop [q:]. Instead, it has two fortis affricates - the aspirated [q͡χʰ:] and the ejective [q͡χʼ:]. The Wikipedia page for Avar has the correct table for these sounds.--Mahtrqerin (talk) 02:37, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

American English

I sometimes hear [q] in American English before [ɫ]. For example, American clear sounds like [qʰɫɪə̯ɻ] to me (a non-American). Is that correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.204.80.169 (talk) 01:01, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What country do you live in?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:57, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why would that matter? The question is whether /k/ is sometimes pronounced [q] or at least something between that and [k] in the position mentioned. Do you have information about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.204.85.34 (talk) 15:41, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I'm the one who asked this question more than two years ago. Now, since then I've found out that a retracted pronunciation of /k/ (generally not quite reaching [q]) is a fairly common feature of Multicultural London English. This is somewhat unrelated since in this accent it has nothing to do with an adjacent [ɫ], but at least it proves that a retracted [k]~[q] does exist in English as such. I still think that I've heard it in American English in the position described above. 178.4.151.28 (talk) 00:57, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PPS: I've just come across a very distinct example of what I mean. In this video, between 1:03:55 and 1:04:05, the bald speaker (a fairly well-known political analyst, whose name I forgot) says the word "clear" with a uvular stop (or at least a very retracted velar stop) three times. I don't know if I've ever heard it as distinctly as in this example. It may tend to be a bit less uvular, but it's definitely a thing. 90.186.170.236 (talk) 08:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To me it just sounds like an overly forced/emphasized velar stop. Emdosis (talk) 23:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another example here, this time not before /l/ but /w/. Speaker says "quiet" with a uvular stop twice between 02:15 and the end of the video. 178.4.151.40 (talk) 01:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kazakh

add Kk-kazakhstan.ogg to kazakh section? 2001:1BA8:1616:C800:55D6:F85B:E058:79CF (talk) 17:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]