IPA Confusion

[abi]

Alright, some questions on the IPA here. I'm pretty familiar with it, and it seems there seems to be either a lot of confusion with everyone else, or I'm just getting things wrong here...

<aw> - [aw] as in "noun"

But "noun" is [naʊn], I don't understand the usage of [w] after a vowel, and I have a similar problem with the next vowel (or rather diphthong?)

<ay> - [aj] as in "eye"

This is wrong too, "eye" is [aɪ], what's all this [Vj] business?

The digraph <ts>. Why is it's IPA symbol [c]? Isn't this a bit backwards orthography wise? (Usually the letter <c> represents [ts].)

<tx>'s IPA transcription is [t!], [!] is a click though, shouldn't it be [t'] like on the chart?

[Taronyu]

Hey. You make really good points here. So good, that I addressed them in a document I've partially made here.

I don't know why we've started using [j]. are you sure it doesn't work?

Where are you getting these IPA transcriptions from?

[abi]

Hey. You make really good points here. So good, that I addressed them in a document I've partially made here.

I don't know why we've started using [j]. are you sure it doesn't work?

Where are you getting these IPA transcriptions from?

I got the transcriptions from the table on the site:
http://www.learnnavi.org/navi-phonetics/

[Taronyu]

Ah. I see.

You may very well be right. I want to know what you think, when you read that document. Please let me know.

[abi]

So far the document seems pretty good, nice and clear. The dictionary format is pretty good too.

[Taronyu]

I've been thinking: You may be right about [j], but what is the actual difference?

Also, note my /w/ issues. That was the main reason I linked that.

[Keylstxatsmen]

Yeah, I tried to bring this up in another topic, but I guess I didn't explain myself very well.

I thought the 'ts" IPA should be [ʦ] like Japanese つ(tsu) and agree ejectives should be followed by a ['], [!]'s are clicks in IPA.

I think as Dr. Frommer said in an interview, he doesn't use straight IPA and that's probably where the confusion is coming from.  I do wonder if in his "Americanized system" -- I think he called it this, I'm just paraphrasing what I remember -- the [j] and the [w] stand for vowels the represent at the end of English words or and actual consonants as suggested by the IPA.  I assume he just meant how they are articulated in American English, and everything should be taken from that and ported to IPA transcriptions.

Ma Taronyu, I really like what you've done with the Grammer pdf so far (not sure about the English word "poot" ) but it seams closer to Dr. Frommer original article that the HTML on the site.

-Keyl

[Taronyu]

Yeah, I tried to bring this up in another topic, but I guess I didn't explain myself very well.

I thought the 'ts" IPA should be [ʦ] like Japanese つ(tsu) and agree ejectives should be followed by a ['], [!]'s are clicks in IPA.

I think as Dr. Frommer said in an interview, he doesn't use straight IPA and that's probably where the confusion is coming from.  I do wonder if in his "Americanized system" -- I think he called it this, I'm just paraphrasing what I remember -- the [j] and the [w] stand for vowels the represent at the end of English words or and actual consonants as suggested by the IPA.  I assume he just meant how they are articulated in American English, and everything should be taken from that and ported to IPA transcriptions.

Ma Taronyu, I really like what you've done with the Grammer pdf so far (not sure about the English word "poot" ) but it seams closer to Dr. Frommer original article that the HTML on the site.

Yes, that was my goal, to have a closer understanding. The problem is that a precedent has been set, and that will be hard to change. Is [ʦ] an IPA ligature? That'd be brilliant to use. I think I'll edit my dictionary, use that, actually, it makes much more sense. That's how I've been seeing it, as well.The ejectives here are just plain wrong: ! is certainly a click. I'm not sure about "poot" either, but it did seem halfway between foot and food.

Sorry to drag my grammar into this, by the way, but I feel like we ought to have a document like that, which has all the information, not only the information which is convenient for us to use, or convenient for people to learn.

[Doolio]

Alright, some questions on the IPA here. I'm pretty familiar with it, and it seems there seems to be either a lot of confusion with everyone else, or I'm just getting things wrong here...

<aw> - [aw] as in "noun"

But "noun" is [naʊn], I don't understand the usage of [w] after a vowel, and I have a similar problem with the next vowel (or rather diphthong?)

<ay> - [aj] as in "eye"

This is wrong too, "eye" is [aɪ], what's all this [Vj] business?

The digraph <ts>. Why is it's IPA symbol [c]? Isn't this a bit backwards orthography wise? (Usually the letter <c> represents [ts].)

<tx>'s IPA transcription is [t!], [!] is a click though, shouldn't it be [t'] like on the chart?

aw - there is, although slight, difference between the [nawn] and the [naun] (i dont know the ascii for that specific u).
for instance, say 'world' or 'weed', then isolate 'w'. you got the na'vi 'w' right there:) so, 'aw' would be something like 'ah-w'. bout 'noun' is pronounced 'na-un', not 'na-wn'. in na'vi 'aw' you don't make that 'aah-ooh' sound, but more of a 'aah-w'. omg i hope i did not confuse you even more, please understand that it is hard for me to explain something in written form in my non-native language:)

eye - there is, also, a slight difference between the [ai] and the [aj], and it is very similar to the one mentioned above. when you say 'yada yada yada', the first letter is tje [j], so you would write it as [jada] and not [iada]. whereas in 'eye' the air flows more freely and the transition [a] to (i) is softer. one important thing - [j] is the consonant, you can't say [jjjjj] without chopping.

ts - also slight difference between the [ts] and the [c]
[ts] is formed by two consonants, [t] and (s), althoug they are nearly merged, they are not merged completely, therefore they are written as [ts]. [c], on the other hand is one consonant. in na'vi 'ts' is pronounced [c], not [ts]. similar to, say, [tz] or [ts] in english, but 'more merged', merged completely into one consonant - [c].

tx - this is due to the fact that frommer is using the ' to represent a glottal stop (as the transitional cut in english "uh-oh" between uh and oh, for example), so the ' is already taken. so he decides to mark ejectives with an 'x' following the basic consonant.

edit:
treat (i) and (s) as they were in [], it messes with the phbb, so i had to put them in regular brackets.

[Taronyu]

Doolio, I want to know where you get this information, or how you can assume it.

I'm fairly certain that [j] is a continuant, for one thing. I fail to see the distinction phonetically, besides phonological rules.

That wouldn't be [c], it'd be [ç], which is reflected nowhere in Frommer's literature, although [c] is - but I doubt he meant to be transcribing the ligature he uses, ts, as the palatal stop, of all things. And the actors certainly don't make that distinction.

This is very interesting, but really not suited for the beginner forum. I'm moving this to intermediate.

[Doolio]

well, i am taking it from my language where we pronounce letters by IPA standard. i think it is pretty unique in that matter. na'vi has very, very similar phonetics. for example, a, e, i, o, u, m, n, and nearly every letter in na'vi is pronounced the same in serbian and in many other slavic languages.
also, in latin, which i have studied (in highschool to be honest, but still i am very good at pronunciation and it follows the same rules). also, the phonetic basis that have people that speak those languages is far more open to that of other languages, whether english is not. for example, i have no problem pronunciating the english 'r' or any other english sound at that matter, but a lot of english speakers seem to get stuck by the trilled 'r' or na'vi 'ng'. i even saw some american linguists and professors on discovery and similar television channels have trouble with pronouncing latin properly and anglo-izing it.
what i want to say is that (by coincidence or not, it does not matter), na'vi has very, very similar phonetics and even parts of grammar to those languages and that is pretty natural to me to understand what frommer says and why he says it, the phonetics, cases, suffixes etc.
also, we had english at school and in the begining stadiums you use a lot of dictionary, naturally. so we have to know the IPA standard as to read the words in english, so i am pretty much aquainted with various combinations and ipa notifications.

of course, i am not telling you this because i want to brag or something, it is just a coincidence that na'vi comes so natural to me (that it has so similar phonetics to my language), but i think i can use that coincidence to the advantage of everybody here. i am very weak in terms of vocabulary, so-so in grammar, but phonetics are really natural to me, for example, if i have never heard na'vi and if i have never new anything about it, and you give me the piece of paper with na'vi sentences, i would probably read it 90% correctly because the phonetics are so similar to my language.

what i said is not contrary to what you said, maybe it is difficult for me to be understood in written form in a non-native language. and i am not a linguist, i am trying to explain things the way i can, which can be pretty confusing, i guess...

about [j], yes, i am aware that it could be continuant, but 'not so pretty' continuant:) it is continuant as is 'l' for example: you can say 'lllllll' but you have to hear the start and the end of the sound for it to be real 'l'. ughh...i mean, you can say 'eeeeeeeee' and chop it in some sound editing program and crop half of a second from the middle and it will still be a clear 'e'. if you do that with 'l' or 'j' you will not get that clear sound.

for [c] also, i am certain of it, but it seems that i have trouble explaining.


okay, here's what i'll do. i already promised that i will record a spelling test (there is a topic in 'intermediate' i think) when i get my hands on a mic.
at same expense, i'll record these differencies, so you can hear them. i think that the most confusing part here is that they are very, and i mean VERY slight differencies and that many won't be able to make a difference even with the help of an audio clip. in other words, if you are not a very nitpicking nitpicker:) you could go either way. i think that neytiri herself wouldn't slap you in the forehead if you said [ts] instead of a [c].

[Taronyu]

While I admire your boldness, I doubt that you know IPA that well. [c], as I have stated, is stop, while /ts/ is an approximate, according to Frommer himself. Serbian doesn't have contrasting ejectives, either, and none of the slavs I've talked to had perfect English pronunciation unless they lived in the US or UK for half their life.

As for /j/ and /w/, well, I've learned a fair bit here, just now. Hmm. So there does seem to be some phonetic difference (I don't know why I assumed otherwise, that was stupid.) And the nature of /j/ is that is occurs as a change in the formants: this also happens with /i/, though, in the sense that it isn't static and would look like a [j], if the [j] were extended at it's maximal closure point, which I assure you it can be. The using of /j/ in a dipthong may not be justified, but it is certainly justified in the sense that [aɪ] is not what is being said when Frommer uses /ay/, as he means something more like [ai], which is better transcribed, to my knowledge, as [aj], as the y in American English, his native tongue, is an approximant.

[Doolio]

While I admire your boldness

i was afraid that you would say something like this, but i really didn't want to sound like that, if i was i am sorry.

about [c] - i was merely pointing out the difference between [c] and [ts], which exists. if na'vi "ts" is pronounced [ts] (according to frommer, as you said) and not [c] then i was wrong and i appologise. but [c] is not same as [ts].

about serbian - yes, serbian doesn't have ejectives, glottal stop and the na'vi "ä", but everything else is pretty much the same. about pronunciation, it is more of a dialect thing than of a clear pronunciation. i am pretty sure that i can speak english phonetically correct, but with a funny accent, which, you will agree, is another matter:) i mean, i can pronunciate english letters correctly, when i speak i might get lost from time to time, but i can physically position my mouth and say every english letter or word. that's what i meant, i didn't want to say that i speak fluently or without accent. i can pronunciate the english "r", or french "r", or serbian/russian trilled "r", or spanish sharp "r", but many of the native english speakers have trouble with some of these. that's what i was saying.
pretty much the same thing with grammatical cases, if your native language does not have them, you will have harder time to grasp the concept.

about [j], like i said, in general use, you practically won't make a mistake if you would pronunciate "ay" like [ai] or like [aj]. i just wanted to point out that there is a difference, however suptle it may be.

[Taronyu]

Ke tìnkawng (no worries.) I'm sorry if I offended.

Ah, alright. Yes, [c] and [ts] are different. Where I've transcribed IPA in documents, I use the ligature for [ts], which I think is as close as we can get, IPA wise. As for /j/ vs. /i/, yeah, there is a subtle difference. What I was trying to communicate is that I don't think we can nail down which is more "proper" for Na'vi.

And personally, my trill completely sucks. I'm 95% positive it's a bioligical thing, however. Some people just can't pronounce it. I have a short tongue, and am not use to a retroflex [r], so I think that may inhibit the ability for me to loosen up the tip to be trilled. Word-initial [ŋ] is another matter - non-trained English speakers do have a tough time with this. [Not me, but I've had three years of Linguistics training].

Irayo, ma tsmukan.

[Doolio]

Ke tìnkawng (no worries.) I'm sorry if I offended.

of course you didn't offend, i am the one bringing the confusion due to not knowing all the linguistic terms and english not being my native language combo:)

Ah, alright. Yes, [c] and [ts] are different. Where I've transcribed IPA in documents, I use the ligature for [ts], which I think is as close as we can get, IPA wise. As for [j] vs. , yeah, there is a subtle difference. What I was trying to communicate is that I don't think we can nail down which is more "proper" for Na'vi.

well, imho, in any case, you can't be much wrong pronunciation-wise. they are very similar.

And personally, my trill completely sucks. I'm 95% positive it's a bioligical thing, however. Some people just can't pronounce it. I have a short tongue, and am not use to a retroflex [r], so I think that may inhibit the ability for me to loosen up the tip to be trilled. Word-initial [ŋ] is another matter - non-trained English speakers do have a tough time with this. [Not me, but I've had three years of Linguistics training].

well, i do have couple of friends that can't pronounce trilled "r" (which is used extensively in serbian) and there is absolutely no chance to teach them. they speak french-like "r" instead. it seems to me that one in ten or maybe one in fifteen serbians can't say serbian "r"
but, i think that's because they didn't go to logopedist when they were little kids, and not because they are 'biologically impaired':) of course, now they simply can't be thaught because they are thirty or so, they are stuck in their misinterpretation for decades and they just cannot grasp the concept.
imho, i disagree with you, i think that everyone can speak 'everything', that it's a cultural thing. if you were born here, i think that you would pronounce trilled r just fine:)

maybe a little advice:
if your tongue is not loose enough, just try to increase the air pressure. even very hard materials will start to trill at some point.
check out this post where i made an example with a whistle:
http://forum.learnnavi.org/index.php?topic=46.msg9280#msg9280

Irayo, ma tsmukan.

ke, ngaru irayo, ma taronyu:) (it is probably incorrect, but hey, what can you do:) )

oh, yes, you migh want to edit your post, because your [ i ] interfered with the forum code and you have italized your entire post:) it happened to me too just today:)

[Taronyu]

But I'm 21....sigh. Stupid critical period.

I can sort of do a trill, it just as very high frication and is palatalized.

[Doolio]

the problem is that i think i know what you are doing, but i can't explain what you should do, because to me it comes natural, and i can't describe it:(

i certainly hope you nail it.

[Keylstxatsmen]

Ah, alright. Yes, [c] and [ts] are different. Where I've transcribed IPA in documents, I use the ligature for [ts], which I think is as close as we can get, IPA wise. As for [j] vs. , yeah, there is a subtle difference. What I was trying to communicate is that I don't think we can nail down which is more "proper" for Na'vi.

well, imho, in any case, you can't be much wrong pronunciation-wise. they are very similar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_palatal_plosive

If we are talking IPA [c] is not the same as [ts] or more correctly [ʦ], unless you think voiced/voiceless and point of articulation aren't large differences.    [c] is also not in Serbian, while [ç] is, and these are completely different from each other as well ([c] being very similar to English /ch/ and [ç] being the fricative /h/ sound in German Ich).  Although I don't speak Serbian so you can correct me there if I'm wrong.

I think the good thing about sticking closely to the IPA standards is that anyone can go look up these sounds and find them in languages they know how to pronounce.  If we try to show how everything can be made with English sounds, there is going to be a lot of approximation.

Not trying to be a Troll, just trying to point out some differences.  I also couldn't trill my r's but after learning the flapped r in Japanese and walking home every day from work trying to extend it, I can finally do a passably long trill.  Not bad after two years of practice.  I also have a stupid dumpy tongue, so I agree that if you put some time into it you will also be able to do it.

-Keyl

[Doolio]

no, the serbian "c" is similar to na'vi "ts" or english "ts" in "its" or german "z" in "zeit". are there any audio examples of [c] and [ts] and [ç], so i could listen to them? then i could tell you for sure which of those is serbian "c".

in serbian we have "č" that is similar to english "ch", and "ć" that is similar to how you would hear "ci" in italian "marciano" for instance, so they are not similar to our "c".

now i am confused:)

edit:
thanks wikipedia:) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_language

it seems that serbian "c" is marked as [ts], and there is no [c] or [ç]. i was wrong and i appologize. what i want to know now is how [c] and [ç] sound like:)

okay, from this we could safely say that na'vi "ts" should be marked as [ts].


irayo, ma Keyltstxatsmen:) the [ts] thing has been cleared up:)

in conversations like these i always think of how easier it would be if we were in the same room, talking:)

[Keylstxatsmen]

Seriously, ma Doolio!  It's hard to write and read about pronunciation across linguistic borders! 

Wikipedia has sound samples linked from the IPA page.  I don't know how good they all are, but the ones I've had personal experience with are solid.

-Keyl