Module talk:kpv-IPA

Коми шыкуд йылысь
There are many nuances in the phonetics of the Komi language. The basic provisions about phonetics have not changed since the time of Lytkin's writings. In turn, Lytkin himself used symbols and positions of the Uralic phonetic alphabet to describe the structure of the phonetics of the Komi language. There are some problems with the characterization of sounds in this alphabet. For example, the phoneme [a] and the Permian "Ы" were mistakenly considered central phonemes. Although the difference between the Permian "Ы" and a similar phoneme in Russian was recognized. And the correspondence of the symbol "a" with the similar symbol of IPA has been confirmed. The first step towards correcting this problem was made by the scientist Karmanova in 1994. She brought out the "Ы" to the close phoneme of mid-centralization ([ɯ̽]). However, her problem was that she did not believe the existence of an unlabialized pair to the phoneme [u]. There is ambiguity in the question of the characteristics of "Ö", however, even in the book "Oxford Guide to the Uralic Languages", focusing on the works of Lytkin and other Komi philoologists who attributed "Ö" to phonemes of the same series as the phoneme [e], they deduced that the letter "Ö" is probably denotes the close-mid phoneme [ɘ]. And it's not about the differences in the articulation of individual individuals. The endowment of the letter "O" with the phonetic correspondence [o̞] has no basis, except for the connection with the central phoneme schwa. 89.148.243.125 11:15, 13 November 2022 (UTC)


 * On : this is exactly why we're using : That's not to say that it's central, but that it's centralised (i.e. more central than the cardinal vowel).
 * As for, this is the terrain of free variation: I've heard it realised as low as and as high as . This is why we're using the schwa, since it's kind of a catch-all, we could choose any other mid central-ish vowel, but it doesn't really matter. For reference:
 * In Bubrikh (1949), it is described as - I can only deduce - in stressed positions and  in unstressed positions. ("гласный среднего подъема, среднего ряда, очень слабо огубленный; В неударном положении несколько приближается к э, в частности утрачивает всякое огубление" and "ближе к заднему ряду, чем к переднему")
 * Lytkin (1955) is vague. He describes it as "напоминает звук русского языка, в московском произношении, встречающийся в первом слоге после ударения" (so ), and does not call it rounded. He also states (as he does more explicitly in his peace for Финно-Угорские и Самодийские языки (1966), that it resembles the English in.
 * Manova's Учимся говорить по-коми (1994) was the main basis for this module and describes as "Средний подъем; Средний ряд" while describing  as "Верхне-средний подъем; Передний ряд". So definitely some kind of mid central vowel, either, or, alternatively,  - note that phonetically these symbols are almost the same.
 * Oxford's guide only handles phonological transcriptions, and as you may have noticed, they used for, so I'm pretty sure they just took a random value and made it work.
 * Batalova's piece on Komi in Языки мира: Уральские языки is frankly useless for this, since she again calls it mid central. Both she and Lytkin also use the UPA symbol e̮, also quite useless for the identification.
 * Finally, and I apologise for the level of this, but it is quite widely considered a standard material, the sound displayed in the video at Komikyv is quite definitely.
 * being central and not high is widely accepted by Komi speakers. Again, in Manova's textbook above, and the Komikyv website: Коми звук Э узкий. Растянем е в русскоми слове пе-е-е-ели, и где-то посередине услышим коми Э. (take also a listen to the video) - this is definitely a high . The, however, is not described as different from the Russian vowel nor is it pronounced differently in the video. Thadh (talk) 13:41, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The use of the schwa symbol cannot be reasoned by the difference of transcriptions and the differences of linguists in the field of phoneme classification. Moreover, there is a case, as you have confirmed, of negligent simplification or errors due to a lack of information in the field of Komi phonetics. Also, the materials on the site you provided do not confirm the presence of the schwa phoneme. I agree that the phonemes are similar, but there is no reduction of phonemes in the Permian languages, which gives some doubt to the assumption of schwa, which is a reduced phoneme in most languages. There is also a factor of alternation of the specified phoneme with the closed phonemes [o] and [ɯ] in archaisms and loanwords.
 * P.S.: The phoneme [ɛ] is pronounced only in Russified speech. This is not a literary pronunciation, it is a defect or a rare dialecticism. And the phoneme [ɵ] is labialized, which does not correspond to the pronunciation of the sound a-priori. Also, the phoneme [ɯ̈] denotes exactly the central sound. Umlaut in IPA means centralization (see ä). Relatively incomplete centralization is shown using diacritics for mid-centralized phonemes: [ɯ̽].
 * "being central and not high is widely accepted by Komi speakers" is not an argument. Most sources speak about the correspondence of this phoneme with a similar Russian one. phoneme.
 * Komi "Э" is a un-iotated analogue of the letter "Е".
 * There is no reason to designate "A" by the centralized phoneme [ä].
 * 77.43.207.2 77.43.207.2 18:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems you don't quite understand the difference between phonemes and phones. is the phoneme,  is the phonetic realisation - it isn't front, it's central. Likewise,  is the phoneme, while  is the phonetic realisation.
 * As for diaresis, no, it does not mean "central vowel", it means "centralised". The vowel inventory for low vowels is inherently smaller than for high vowels, so may denote a central vowel (although for instance  usually doesn't). However, this is not true for high vowels.  denotes a mid-centralised, not just a centralised sound, so the unlabialised counterpart of, which the Komi vowel does not correspond to (it is not lowered).
 * You do make a point about usually being used for reduced phonemes, but I feel that's more a relic of Indo-European linguistics than something we necessarily need to uphold for other languages. If you feel very strongly about it, changing it to  would be fine by me, but none of the other changes you proposed make sense. Thadh (talk) 19:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay, I understand you about the difference between phonemes and phonetic realizations. However, centralized phonetic realization or central phonetic localization does not make a difference if it is not proven. There is no reason to consider "a" centralized. And "o" — [o̞]. These phone are described as similar to phone of the Russian language.
 * I also understood you about the designation of centralization. However, there is no reason to consider the phonetic implementation centralized. And [ɯ̽] in the writings of Karmanova, which is what I'm talking about, resources of this kind are not always competent. Aggravating the situation is the fact that you can't talk about the subtleties of pronunciation of phones when the main phones are not exactly classified. 77.43.207.2 19:59, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * "resources of this kind are not always competent" just sounds like you saying "no, these sources are wrong, trust me". Why should we? &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 20:10, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * My thesis rather lies in the fact that there are no grounds for designating part of the phones with more refined phones. I also believe that you are not native speakers of the Komi language. 77.43.207.2 20:21, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * None of that makes sense. You're just repeating yourself and saying "trust me, I'm right" with more words. &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 20:49, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * In response, I hear:"If it was like that, then it should be like that" 77.43.207.2 04:30, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * It's you who insists "I know better than all of these sources". You've still not given us a reason to believe you, a random person over the Internet over a bunch of academic sources. &mdash; S URJECTION / T / C / L / 06:46, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The Russian phones are and  though. And we're not talking about "subtleties": If my math is correct, including centralisation and lowering brings the total of vowel phones to 64 phones instead of the 37 you would have otherwise, that's nothing. It's just slightly more useful for readers, so they can understand how it's pronounced more easily. Thadh (talk) 21:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * However, you have no reason to believe that in the Komi language "A" and "O" mean exactly phones [ä]/[o̞]. Are you saying that readers should pronounce some special phone, the presence of which is not even confirmed in the language? Why does "В" stand for [ʋ]? 77.43.207.2 04:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Because it is not a fricative. I may not be a native Komi speaker but surely I have ears? Thadh (talk) 10:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)