Phonological question:
Dec. 12th, 2005 03:09 amAre the Russian sounds /ш/ and /ж/ retroflexed? They simply sound much harder to me than the English /sh/ and /zh/ sounds. Does anyone know for sure? Wikipedia, as nice as it is, doesn't really list its sources on this subject matter, so if someone could answer this from their own personal knowledge, or could point me to a website (in English or Russian) that details these sounds, that'd be great. Any help in getting a more accurate pronunciation of the /щ/ would also be appreciated!
Спасибо!
Спасибо!
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 09:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 01:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 02:51 pm (UTC)It seems
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 03:48 pm (UTC)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
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 03:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 03:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 04:15 pm (UTC)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.
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 04:19 pm (UTC)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.)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 04:52 pm (UTC)I was mentionning this because it is indeed the major problem for French speaking learners, 'could have helped :))
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 05:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 05:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 06:08 pm (UTC)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
:)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 06:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 06:49 pm (UTC)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?
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 07:32 pm (UTC)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? :)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 08:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 09:01 pm (UTC)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 :)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 09:06 pm (UTC)2. Нет, я не об акустике. Кончик точно не поднят (т. е. не направлен вверх).
:)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 09:13 pm (UTC)1) Bifocality.
2) Labialization.
3) Difference in articulation area between [k] and [x].
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 10:18 pm (UTC)2. ну не вверх, конечно, но приподнят все же по сравнению со свистящими
no subject
Date: 2005-12-12 10:21 pm (UTC)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 :)
no subject
Date: 2005-12-13 11:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-12-13 06:52 pm (UTC)terribly sorry