Phonetics

[Kudla]

Hi,
I wonder what is true about the aspiration of the letter D. Well, I know that the phoneticians write there can´t be any aspiration of lenis consonants (those being voiced like b, d, g, v ...) but on the other hand I can often hear it there.
I am not sure but maybe it has to do with sth I´ve read once. As far as I can remember it said sth to the intent that only when there is a distinction between two possibilities (I guess) than it is necessary to distinguish them:
spy (no aspiration) while pie (aspiration present)
but words like hit, sit or like are said to have no aspiration as they are thus pronounced, even though we can aspirate them as well but the point is both these forms are acceptable so they need not be distinguished.
What do you think? E. g. I can clearly hear it especially when people talk emphatically: Damn it! (I feel it´s aspirated) as well as at the end of words (again).

 

[Raymott]

Hi,
I wonder what is true about the aspiration of the letter D. Well, I know that the phoneticians write there can´t be any aspiration of lenis consonants (those being voiced like b, d, g, v ...) but on the other hand I can often hear it there.
I am not sure but maybe it has to do with sth I´ve read once. As far as I can remember it said sth to the intent that only when there is a distinction between two possibilities (I guess) than it is necessary to distinguish them:
spy (no aspiration) while pie (aspiration present)
but words like hit, sit or like are said to have no aspiration as they are thus pronounced, even though we can aspirate them as well but the point is both these forms are acceptable so they need not be distinguished.
What do you think? E. g. I can clearly hear it especially when people talk emphatically: Damn it! (I feel it´s aspirated) as well as at the end of words (again).

I agree that all plosives can be aspirated. In some languages, eg. Hindi, aspirated /b, d, g / are different letters from non-aspirated /b, d, g /.

This from Wiki:
The word 'aspiration' and the aspiration symbol is sometimes used with voiced stops, such as [dʰ]. However, such "voiced aspiration", also known as breathy voice or murmur, is less ambiguously transcribed with dedicated diacritics, either [d̤] or [dʱ].
Aspiration (phonetics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PS: In English we don't do /sb/, /sd/, /sg/

 

[Kudla]

Thanks a lot!

 

[BobK]

As Raymott says, any stop can be aspirated. As voiced ones aren't aspirated in English to make a phonemic distinction most English speakers have stopped bothering to hear the aspiration. For example, I don't hear one in 'Damn', although it doesn't surprise me at all to learn that there is one. You're lucky ;-) Your native language's phonology has made you aware of something that most of us English native speakers are not aware of.

Speakers of, say, Indian English, who may use English as their main language but are immersed in a linguistic environment in which - in other languages - [d] is distinctively aspirated - would also be able to hear this. (When a child first learns its own language, it learns to ignore phonetic distinctions that are not meaning-bearing. In time, they grow to be unable to hear those distinctions, though if taught (in a Phonetics course, say) they can repair the damage - to an extent. :-( ;-)

b

 

[Kudla]

Thanks, I find your comment interesting, though I think it is logical and I myself can think of sth similar in my native tongue.

 

[özlemlonging]

This phonetics!!!!

 

[lauralie2]

Hello Kudla,

Every sound is produced with air that travels from the lungs, up through the windpipe, through the glottis (the space between the vocal folds) and then out through the mouth or the nose.

With some sounds, the sound of air is quite noticeable depending on how the air flow is impeded (e.g., p, k, t), and with other sounds not as noticeable (e.g., d, b, g), but the release of air is there and audible.

In "damn" you hear residual air, not aspiration, which is what you're hearing, as well, at the end of words. It's residual air, nothing more, not aspiration.

 

[BobK]

I think you're using 'aspiration' in a sense different from that used by me and Raymott. ;-)

b

 

[lauralie2]

I think you're using 'aspiration' in a sense different from that used by me and Raymott. ;-)

b

Most definitely.

 

[Kudla]

Thank you all for enlightening this to me!
I also wondered how do you deal with some clusters of consonants at the end of one word and beginning of the other e.g.:
I met that kind boy - I mean how do you actually pronounce such a sentence? I have read that some speakers make use of the assimilation of place and say sth like I meth thak kinb boy (sorry for not using IPA) - i.e. the last consonant of these words is pronounced as the first one of the following (I think that in practice the air is obstructed for a short time with the tongue prepared to utter th, k and b respectively before it is released).
While others (as I´ve read) put the tongue to such a position to pronounce the last consonant of such words but before the air is released they stop for a very short moment - the so-called glottal stop and instead of the final consonant they quickly change the position of tongue so as to utter the initial consonant of the next word - so the final consonant is not aspirated.
Could you let me know what you think about this?
Thanks

 

[BobK]

:up: Broadly, you're right. In speech that is not carefully enunciated, people do say /kaɪm'bɒɪ/; in a related change (but the /n/ is 'assimilating' to the closing of the mouth at the end of a conversation), many people say, for example, /faɪm/ as they're leaving a room - though they're probably not aware of it; whereas they would say faɪn/ if they were going on to say '....that's what we'll do.'

Your second paragraph is closer to the mark about the 'met the' assimilation, though I'd have said 'so the final consonant is not released'. As lauralie2 says, that's not aspiration - it's just what happens to the residual air.

b

 

[Kudla]

You´re right! Release is the word I was looking for.
As for the pairs of words or individual words like:
Good night, had not, hadn´t, eaten, rednote
I have read that the former consonant (t,d) is released as the nasal explosion (the soft palate is lowered) so that the tip of the tongue rests on the alveolar ridge all the time during the articulation of the sequence t (d) + n. In that case the same applies to the inderlined part in "a long handled knife" (as also the latteral explosion is present here).
But is it also standard to pronounce them separately - t (d) aspirated + n? I have read that it is not but I ask because for me it is quite demanding and if I´m not not aware of it the best I can think of is that I form t (d) with the soft palate raised to obstruct the air flow and when I should release it through the nose all I do is just articulate "n" when the soft palate is lowered. I think this is not the correct pronunciation either, or is it?
I think there are also examples where no nasal explsion is present like "London" is it right?
What about k + n is the nasal explosion present here as well? I find it even more difficult to pronounce and would rather aspirate the former consonant. I have also heard that in some words such as "bacon" I can even pronounce the sylabic velar variant of "n". What do you think?
Thank you very much!

 

[Kudla]

Could anyone answer my question(s), please?
Thank you!

 

[5jj]

Could anyone answer my question(s), please?
Thank you!

I might try if you would ask one question per thread.

 

[Kudla]

Fair enough.
In the word eaten is it a standard pronunciation to aspirate the T or do I have to create the nasal explosion?
Thanks

 

[5jj]

Fair enough.
In the word eaten is it a standard pronunciation to aspirate the T or do I have to create the nasal explosion?
Thanks

In my moderately conservative southern British RP pronunciation, /t/ is not aspirated; there is homorganic nasal release.

 

[Kudla]

but in the word London it is not the case - possibly due to the sequence /nasal+stop+nasal/, right?

 

[5jj]

but in the word London it is not the case - possibly due to the sequence /nasal+stop+nasal/, right?

In my moderately conservative southern British RP pronunciation, I am not aware of any aspiration in /d/; I always have a schwa between /d/ and /n./

 

[Kudla]

Thanks, I have supposed so.
As for the word bacon, what are the possible pronunciations - I´ve read that the N sound can be, apart form alveolar, also released as a velar syllabic N. What do you think?

 

[5jj]

Thanks, I have supposed so.
As for the word bacon, what are the possible pronunciations - I´ve read that the N sound can be, apart form alveolar, also released as a velar syllabic N. What do you think?

Sorry about the delayed response - have been on holiday for a few days. I think you are right; it is also sometimes partly devoiced in such words as bacon and thicken and may approach [FONT=&quot]/[/FONT]ŋ[FONT=&quot]/[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]