Re: Odp: Phonetics

----- Original Message -----

From: Iuri Gaspar

To: cybalist@egroups.com

Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2000 12:29 AM

Subject: [cybalist] Re: Odp: Phonetics

 

Iuri writes:

The people I know in Poland (Wolsztyn, województwo Poznańskie, Wielkopolska) like to pronunciate the [ł] as /ł/, so I

heard it all the time. And now I understand why the portuguese final /l/ and the polish /ł/, although similar sounds, seemed

to me a little different: ours is alveolar, yours is dental. I've seen in some portuguese phonetics books the representation

of our final and preconsonantal /l/ as [ł], the velarised [l]. In the same books our pre-vowel /l/ is represented as [l] (as

in french, british english, polish). I assume it represents only the alveolar clear sound. So, if it's true that some people

(me included) don't pronunciate it clearly but darkly, can we still represent it as [l]? Or should we write [ł]?

[ł] is a decent approximation of the IPA symbol, but the actual recommended character is an l with a tilde (rather than an oblique stroke) across it. Such a tilde symbolises velarisation ("darkness"). The normal practice when we transcribe a language PHONEMICALLY is to use diacritics as sparingly as possible -- just as many as are needed for the transcription to be unambiguous; and since Portuguese has no /l/ : /ł/ contrast, /l/ will do perfectly well as a symbol for the non-palatal lateral (a lambda-like upside-down y is the IPA symbol for Portuguese lh). Of course in narrow phonetic transcription (such as used when discussing subtle phonetic issues) more accuracy is required.

 

BTW in Wielkopolska [w] has long been the only natural pronunciation. Your friends evidently use [ł] for their own private satisfaction, just like those speakers of English (not of a Scottish or Irish variety) who insist on making a distinction between w and wh. If your friends don't come from eastern Poland, they must have learnt to pronounce [ł] artificially, like some actors, opera-singers and public speakers.

In portuguese, as you well said, there's also the [w] sound, represented by the letter /u/ or /o/ in nonstressed positions.

I should make a remark : there are some differences between the brazilian and the european variants of portuguese,

and they are not only phonetic, but also in lexicon and even synthax. The final /l/ in Brazil as undergone vocalisation and

is now pronunciated [w] (as in polish and in many different languages, as you stated very clearly). But in Portugal it

remains [ł], and that's clearly established everywhere in the country.

According to Ladefoged & Maddieson (The Sounds of the World's Languages, 1996 -- a mine of knowledge, BTW), who cite Feldman's (1972) description of Brazilian Portuguese, the final /l/ there has no occlusion but a marked raising of the tip of the tongue towards the alveolar ridge (a "lazy" lateral). Acoustically, it contrasts with both /l/ and /w/, albeit in very subtle ways. According to the same source it merges with /w/ for some speakers of Brazilian Portuguese. I suppose all your impressions concerning Brazilian are now accounted for. You must have a very good ear for phonetic nuances, Iuri!

The tip of the tongue touches the back of the upper teeth and the alveolar ridge simultaneously. Maybe it's not typically

alveolar nor typically dental. The fact is it has to be different from the polish sound, because one time I and a polish friend

spent a hour trying to pronunciate each other's sound unsuccesfully. Somehow we found it always different.

The contrast probably depends on the position of the REST of the tongue. As far as I know, Portuguese /l/ is APICAL, which means that the blade of the tongue is lowered, while the tip is raised and pressed against the alveo-dental area. Portuguese uses apicality as a means of emphasising the difference between l and lh.The Polish sound as used by your friends is probably more LAMINAL, with the front part of the tongue (including the blade) in a more horizontal position. The area of occlusion is then wider than for the apical, though it can also be characterised as alveo-dental. Of course Polish [ł] is also "dark", which means that the remaining part of the tongue is shaped as if for the articulation of /u/. If the middle of the tongue were raised and the area of contact included a good part of the hard palate, the result would be a laminal palato-alveolar lateral like Portuguese lh or old-fashioned Castilian ll.

 

BTW, Polish plain /l/ is alveolar and apical, but not dark (the  back of the tongue is kept low). It is the same as French /l/, and, like the latter, may occasionally involve "retroflection" -- the curving back of the tip of the tongue, so that it touches the hard palate behind the alveolar ridge.

 

Piotr