Learn Russian

+1.
It seems

kazak is confusing retroflexion and velarization (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velarization). English /sh/ and /zh/ sound quite palatalized and, AFAIK, are rounded (am I right?).

From:

Cf. below.

From:

Are the (or: "some") English /sh/-/zh/ rounded?

From:

A good question for L1 speakers versed in phonetics :)

My guess is: not at all, or at least much less so than the Russian sounds in question.

(Although "rounded" is probably not an especially accurate term with regard to the latter.)

From:

I see. So rounding is not a source of interference for English speaking learners.
I was mentionning this because it is indeed the major problem for French speaking learners, 'could have helped :))

From:

That is, the French sounds are rounded?

From:

yes they are.

From:

I think there is some confusion here.

It's true that a sound quite similar with Ш acoustically can be produced by simply raising the tip of the tongue while producing an s-like sound. I don't know how common this is as a speech disorder, but it's certainly a mistake quite expectable with L2 speakers.

But it's also true that with Ш and Ж the tip of the tongue is placed higher than with other Russian alveolars/dentals; see my comment below for details.

From:

Ш and Ж differ from the resp. English sounds in several ways:

1) Yes, they are retroflex - for the Russian standards; that is, tip of tongue is much higher than with С and З (or Ч and Щ, or Т and Д). This doesn't mean, however, that it is necessarily higher than with English T, D (esp. in typical American accents).

2) Yes, they are velarized. Like all the "hard" consonants in Russian.

3) English [ʃ] and [ʒ] are bifocal alveo-palatal fricatives; in contrast, the Russian sounds are bifocal alveo-velars; in other words, the secondary focus of friction is located much further back than in English.

4) Russian Ш and Ж are partly labialized. More precisely, they are pronounced with lips strongly protruding forwards but not rounded. Yes, this "flat" labialization does affect the resulting sound, making it still "deeper". Just try that.

The advice to consult with

4u6 was a good one.

From:

ok - given you distinguish "retroflex" and "cacuminal"

From:

usually not distinguished in Western tradition

From:

1) +1; even "higher than with English T, D (esp. in typical American accents)", I guess
2) +1, and this is the main difference
3) typically, there is no "secondary focus of friction" in these sounds, just velarization (non-consonantal constriction) in Russian vs. no constriction at all in English
4) I would say "may be partly labialized in some idiolects" - it's not usual in Russian. Thus, I have to forbid any lips movements while teaching [ш], [ж] to American and German students, otherwise [ш] & [ж] sound quite not-Russian

:)

From:

3) So, actually they're plain retroflex versions of [s], [z]? Strangely, I feel some difference.

OK, when I produce a prolonged [xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]...
And then I try to raise the tip of my tongue in order to simultaneously produce an s-like sound...
...Then I get to something quite similar to my normal Ш (only, the friction on both ends is less intense in the latter).

And when I start from a prolonged tense [jjjjjjjjjjjj]... then I get to something which I'd identify with the English [ʃ] (with same remark about friction intensity)... OK, in fact, it seems that the starting friction must be a bit deeper back than with [j], in back palatal area...

Is all that totally based on misperception?

From:

...Or, the other way round...

When I produce a prolonged Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш-Ш, and then try to weaken the alveolar friction, I'm left with a lax velar [xxxxxx]. I can even specify that it's less deep than my regular [x]; rather, I articulate it in the same area as [k] (while my normal [x] is considerably deeper).

Doctor, is this contagious? :)

From:

[ох, прошу прощения, но буду по-русски, а то очень долго получается и не всегда вразумительно
и сразу на два Ваших комментария тогда]

1. ну, совершенно невозможно ж регулировать степень сужения - естественно, что как только Вы убираете шумообразующую преграду, то она (степень сужения) изменяется
стандартно в РЯ место образования [к] и [х] идентично (в европейской части)
а Вы откуда? :))

2. шипящие [ш], [ж] от свистящих [с], [з] отличаются, в первую очередь, формой щели (плоская в первом случае и круглая, в виде желобка, во втором)
ну и местом образования - (пост)альвелярные [ш], [ж] от зубных [с], [з] (это в РЛЯ)
и положением кончика языка - поднят (какуминальные) [ш], [ж] // опущен (дорсальные) [с], [з]

ну, вопрос же не в том, как можно достичь данного акустического/перцептивного эффекта - я легко могу сделать Вам нормальный русский [у], не вытягивая и не округляя губ - а в том, вроде бы, как это обычно бывает :)

From:

1. Из Москвы, и никогда не жил долго в др. местах.
2. Нет, я не об акустике. Кончик точно не поднят (т. е. не направлен вверх).
:)

From:

1. ну, может, и есть вариативность - я тут, в первую очередь, с точки зрения РКИ, конечно, излагаю, намучавшись с увулырными, фарингальными да ларингальными :)
2. ну не вверх, конечно, но приподнят все же по сравнению со свистящими

From:

Also, I have the impression that I've read somewhere about at least some features I've mentioned. Don't ask me where (or when) :)

1) Bifocality.
2) Labialization.
3) Difference in articulation area between [k] and [x].

From:

1) да, про это пишут иногда, но это, на мой взгляд, неверно - там разные степени сужения: в одном случае щель, а в другом аппроксимант, это лучше различать
2) да, я ж и говорю - это возможно, но иностранцам не надо рекомендовать, особенно немцам
3) про русский? буду рад, если все жевспомните вдруг, где :)

From:

wolk-off.livejournal.com

Please don't forget that it is English that we speak here. For lenghty discussions in Russian, you are free to switch to your own journal, or to go to pishu_pravilno. This is not a community for Russians to discuss their language, this is a place to help non-natives to learn Russian.

From: