Re: Nasal mp/np

altamix wrote:

>I this case we talked about different things.
>I talk about "m" and "n" which are considered nasals
>in the conventional way. It seems in your
>opinion they should be something else.

Not *they*, but apart from them, there's a... third
phonological occurrence, namely the *real* nasal
thing. Whereby you don't have to make use of the
labial part of your uttering apparatus (even its
lingual part can stay almost completely idle!).

>Since I considered "n" and "m" to be nasals

Of course they are. But be gradually aware of another
kind of sound, which is neither M nor N.

In a phonetic transcription, we can choose one symbol
of our own or that what's in the API/IPA alphabet
(datselbe in grün).

>Alex

George