Palatilaziation - Ь and Ъ
Aug. 13th, 2003 01:00 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ugly-boy.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
learn_russianCan someone help me with ь (soft sign) and ъ (hard sign) [or do I have them reversed?]. My first question is, how do you know when a letter is going to be hard or soft? It seems like in English we only use the soft sounds, because borrowed words almost always take a soft sound. In other words, the Russian tendency is to make hard sound and the English tendency is to make a soft sound (thus film → фильм* ; New → Нью). I'm sure this is completely off base, it's just a trend that I've noticed.
I once read—perhaps on in this community—that the sound is very different to Russian ears, but the subtle difference sounds the same to English ears. It was compared to the final sound in the words bed and bet vs the words угил and угиль. Russians cannot distinguish between "bed" and "bet" but I find that very hard to believe... Would a Russian pronounce бэд and бэт the same way?
Anyway, if someone could explain this process of palatilazation to me I would be very greatful.
*Film may have come from French, but the same principle applies.
I once read—perhaps on in this community—that the sound is very different to Russian ears, but the subtle difference sounds the same to English ears. It was compared to the final sound in the words bed and bet vs the words угил and угиль. Russians cannot distinguish between "bed" and "bet" but I find that very hard to believe... Would a Russian pronounce бэд and бэт the same way?
Anyway, if someone could explain this process of palatilazation to me I would be very greatful.
*Film may have come from French, but the same principle applies.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Part 1
Date: 2003-08-15 08:45 pm (UTC)But now that I read it again, I think what you're saying is that the sound change in that verb (and others like it) is a part of the historical (diachronic) grammar, and is just a 'fact' in the synchronic grammar (the grammar viewed as it is at present, with no reference to its development), distinct from the current hard/soft ('palatalisation') issue? Am I anywhere near the mark?? :)
you write that и is a "y+ы"; but, in fact, и does not start with a glide.
Absolutely, I understand that. But I was trying to leave out the exceptions to get the big point across :). I think I hinted about it when I asked about Ukrainian.
It's the 'y' (й = "и краткое" = the Russian for "short i") that's an и in its consonantal form (i-glide).
Ah ha! Interesting... I never thought of itthat way before :)
P.S. Sorry about using so many words
Ha! The kettle calling the pot black :)
Re: Part 1
Date: 2003-08-16 04:53 pm (UTC)'ш' and 'сь' contrast for palatalization ,and you can hear the minimal pair ш/щ (щ is palatalized) here (the web page is the Russian alphabet, pronounced) (http://www.masterrussian.com/blalphabet.cfm) if you click on Ш (the sound clip is the name of the letter, "ша") and then on Щ (they'll say "ща", same as before but palatalized). This is the only minimal pair for palatalization among Russian letter names!
You know all this, though, as I gather from your Irish-in-Cyrillic project. (Surprisingly pretty in Cyrillic too, but I would miss the [remaining] digraphs)