Palatilaziation - Ь and Ъ

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Can 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.

Comments

[corriel.livejournal.com]

I'm too lazy to explain (others will do it I'm sure, anyway), but a Russian manual should be able to answer such questions, so getting one (if u haven't already) would be helpful to u. :o)

Part 1

[ataltane.livejournal.com]

Firstly, you have the signs the right way around. :)

how do you know when a letter is going to be hard or soft?

Ok. There are two ways. One (the less common way by far) is to follow the consonant by the hard or soft sign. This is only used when the usual method (which relies on the consonant being immediately followed by a vowel) fails, and sometimes serves another function as well (more on that after I explain the important bit).

The usual way is to look at the immediately following vowel:
и, е, я, ё, ю make the preceding consonant soft
ы, э, а, о, у make the preceding consonant hard.

From the way you asked the question I'm not sure if you realised that: every consonant is hard or soft, with unmarked consonants being hard.

It seems like in English we only use the soft sounds, because borrowed words almost always take a soft sound

Well, in terms of the actual sounds we make, most English sounds in most dialects are phonetically more similar to the Russian sounds, though some of the soft sounds occur too.

Now there's a further issue that effects whether borrowed sounds are hard or soft, and this is the nature of the vowels. Softness is inextricably linked with what vowel follows - and this is true in all languages (I'm not saying it's an absolute rule anywhere, just a universal tendency). I'll stop talking in generalities and explain, shall I? :)

Right - looking at the 5 basic vowels in Russian (there being 2 letter for each one: 'а' and 'я' for 'A' for example. Ignore for the moment that the 'pair' и and ы actually are different vowels as well. [yers, or anyone: do you know why this is? were they a pair and one drifted? or did Russian used to have a 'yi', like Ukrainian, which was lost, letting an unpaired ы pair up with и?]).... as I was saying, we have 5 basic vowel qualities, i e a o & u. Now ever notice how one of each pair is much (sometimes wildly) more common than the other? Like (using 'x > y' to mean 'x is more common than y') approximately:

y+vowel vowel
и > ы
е >>>>>> э
я <<< а
ё <<<< о
ю <<< у

Why is this? Well the ones for which the 'y-form' is more common are the front vowels, i.e. those produced with the tongue near the front of the mouth, the the one for which the plain form is more common are made further from that region (back vowels). This is because the 'y' sound itself, being a sort of a 'consonantal' form of 'i', is pronounced at the upper front extent of the region in which vowels are pronounced (it's about the frontest sound there is). Similarly, a consonant is more likely to be pronounced soft (i.e. with a brief 'y' sound incorporated in it or following it) in front of the two front vowels и and е.

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Most of the ones I've seen are trying to present it as simply as possible and simply say something like "Don't worry about this sign now". It's very annoying. I should get one, though... :D

Part 2

[ataltane.livejournal.com]

So the borrowing of foreign vowels is more likely to use the 'more natural' of each vowel pairs: namely и е а о ю. Of course there are complications: ы is often chosen и over since it represents a different vowel sound which may be a better representation of the foreign sound. And э might be chosen over е the unusualness of э in Russian might make that sound very distinctively heard in foreign words (like the way I hear foreign accents are sometimes represented in Russian).

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.

There's a lot of FUD around this issue. The fact is that English has similar (though not exactly the same) difference. Say in 'toon' versus 'tune' .... uh... if you're American, your mileage might vary on that one :). But in my part of the world (Ireland, but also true in Britain), the first is 'тун' and the second is 'тюн' (bordering on 'чун', actually).Hey, maybe I just find them easy because Irish has the same system...


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?

I've always read that final voiced consonants are pronounced unvoiced, but from listening to Russian (both among native speakers and on tuition tapes) it doesn't sound like that to me. The issue is complicated, though: speakers of most kinds of English can't distinguish the final sounds of 'bet' and 'bed' from each other per se: rather, the clue lies in the length of the preceding vowel (before a voiced consonant the vowel is a fraction longer). Without those clues (which are in English, but not necessarily other language, which may have different ways of distinguishing them [like actually making the 't' and 'd' more different :)]), I can't really trust what I hear when it comes to voicing of single consonants.


Anyway, if someone could explain this process of palatilazation to me I would be very greatful.


Incidentally, in my experience of literature about Russian (in English), 'palatalisation' is used to refer to a different phenomenon: the way, for example, the way the 'с' in 'писать' ("to write") changes to 'ш' in 'пишу' ("I write"). The palatalisation we're talking about is less of a process and more of a fact of life, so I guess that's ok :)

*Film may have come from French, but the same principle applies.

The principle does indeed apply, but with the opposite conclusion: there's a 'ь' in 'фильм' because that's the way it sounds in French. (it's a hard 'l' in English). Remember that the 'i' in French is like the the 'i' in machine (or even more front), not like the 'i' in English 'film'. Pronounce the French word with that in mind, and you'll see what I mean. In fact, using Cyrillic as a phonetic alphabet :), we have approximately: 'фильм' is the French and 'фылм' is the English. (Though in Dublin, 'филлым' is what you usually hear :)

The other use of the hard/soft signs is to start a new syllable, flavouring the preceding consonant with hardness or softness as appropriate. Actually, I can't explain this area very well, since I'm a bit hazy on the hows and whys, but there's not always a new syllable: in the 'New' of 'New York' (as you've said), it's 'Нью'. AFAIK, this means "Нь + ю", while the apparently more obvious 'Ню' means 'Нь + у'. This is quite subtle to my ears, though over a syllable boundary it's quite clear: 'семья' = 'семь + я', while the (presumably made up) word 'семя' is 'семь + а'. Similar (but even more mind-boggling) things happen with the hard sign. A good example is where you have a verb like 'есть' (this being the infinitive of the verb 'to eat', not the verb 'to be', which is a different 'есть' ;) ... a common Indoeuropean conundrum..) and you want to attach the word 'с' to the front: you can't write 'сесть' because that means 'сь + эсть'. So you write 'съесть', which means 'с + есть', just like 'сьесть' means 'сь + есть'. Phew. Maybe I do understand it (though pride cometh before a fall).



s.

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Thank you... Still a little confusing and it brings up a few more questions, and leaves one unanswered:

• привет - the /r/ and /v/ are soft, here, right? Does that mean that (hypothetically, if it were a word) пръивъет would be pronounced as прывэт?
  
• Should I assume that all consenents are hard when they do not preceed a vowel? Using привет again, the /p/ is hard because it is followed by an /r/ and not by a vowel? Thus филм is pronounced /fьilъmъ/ so the ь sign is necessary to make the /l/ soft?
  
• What's the deal with Нью (as in Нью Йорк) when Ну is closer to the sound in English and the ю makes it soft anyway?!
  

Re: Part 1

[kasak.livejournal.com]

пръивъет would not be pronounced прывэт. Here's why.

When you put a hard sign in front of a soft vowel, like in the word въезд. The в is hard, but the e is still a e. How it is distinguished is you add a tiny tiny pause between saying в and езд, so that the в is not softened.

On your second question, a consonant is softened whenever a soft vowel comes after it. In привет, the р and the в are both soft, because they are followed by soft vowels. If it were прыв(й)эт, the all the consonants would be hard because they are affected by hard vowels.

And regarding Нью Йорк...

Think of how someone with an Oxford English accent saying "New York." They would pronounce it like "Nyoo York." We Americans just pronounce it like Ну Йорк. The Russians were talking with the British long before they started talking to us, so they Russified New York as Нью Йорк because that's how the British pronounced it. English is weird like that. We can pronounce our entire language differently, change vowels and such, and still have it be the same word and the same language. If you did that in Russian, people would be really confused.

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Thank you for explaining the "Нью Йорк" thing, and the rest of it :D

Re: Part 1

[kasak.livejournal.com]

Also, if you want to know why the л in фильм is soft, here's my theory.

Russians borrowed plenty of words from the Germans in their time: маршрут (originally meaning "marching route" now it just means "route"), картофель (potato), холм (originally meaning "island" now it means "hill," since I guess hills are islands of the steppes), кино (cinema/movies).

Taking this into account, and judging from my knowledge of the German language, I can make a guess on why the л in фильм is soft. The /l/ sound in German is different than the /l/ in English and several other Western European languages. Ours is more of a "dark" /l/, meaning that it sounds murkier compared to theirs. Their "light" /l/ sounds almost like a ль, but stops just short of the palatalization mark. All German /l/ sounds are pronounced thusly. It's not quite soft, but it's definitely a more delicate sound than the English /l/.

Again, this is just a theory. I really don't know if it's valid or not. Just my inturpretation of its Russification roots.

Re: Part 1

[yers.livejournal.com]

you add a tiny tiny pause between saying в and езд
Not a pause, but a [j] sound.

[dhr-eigen.livejournal.com]

think of the hard sign (ъ) as of apostrophe, separator between adjacent letters
actually some people write apostrophe instead of ъ, for example: в'езд, под'езд, от'езд, раз'езд
d and t, like for example in Dutch, mostly sound alike when in the end of a word

[yers.livejournal.com]

I think the words should be угол and уголь, "corner" and "coal".

Would a Russian pronounce бэд and бэт the same way?
Well, I've learned not to, for one. But pairs like код/кот certainly are indistinguishable in Russian.

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Another person theorized that it comes from French word (since мьуви is closer to the more commonly used English word) and the French /l/ is a little different from the English /l/. Thanks for all your info!

Re: Part 2

[yers.livejournal.com]

семя isn't made-up, it means "seed".

I've always read that final voiced consonants are pronounced unvoiced, but from listening to Russian (both among native speakers and on tuition tapes) it doesn't sound like that to me.
Really? Russian-speaking Ukrainians pronounce the final в as [v] rather than [f] as in standard Russian, but that's about all I can think of. But another issue comes in here, the voicing of final consonants before a word that starts with a voiced consonant. But they're indistinguishable again, there's an identical [d] in обед готов ('dinner is ready') and обет безбрачия ('oath of celibacy').

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Thanks :D

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Yes, it is угол and уголь, because I remember that one of the words meant "coal." With the код/кот example, is the final letter pronounced /t/ or /d/?

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

So, (this is hypothetical... I have no idea if these are actually words) these would be pronounced like this:

дя → dja
дъа → dja
дья → da
да → da

Re: Part 1

[yers.livejournal.com]

do you know why this is? were they a pair and one drifted? or did Russian used to have a 'yi', like Ukrainian, which was lost, letting an unpaired ы pair up with и?])....
It's a question that every Russian speaker or learner has once asked themself. I was eight or nine when we were explained those paired vowels at school, and I wondered if "и" had once been "йы".

No, "и" and "ы" never were a pair. "ы" was more to do, historically, with "у" than with "и". Consider these pairs of historically related words in Russian and English:

сидеть - to sit
вино - wine
vs.
тысяча - thousand
мышь - mouse

There's a bit more to that, including the 'yi' question, and I think I'm going to write a post about ы.

[yers.livejournal.com]

and the ю makes it soft anyway?!
This comment (http://www.livejournal.com/community/learn_russian/18671.html?thread=149743#t149743) by irkin sums it all up beautifully. The difference is that ню is two sounds and нью is three, with a [j] in the middle.
As if that weren't enough, Нью-Йорк is written with a hyphen. :)

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

That would be a good idea for a post.

[yers.livejournal.com]

/t/ by default, and /d/ if the next word begins with a voiced consonant (EXCEPT й, л, м, and н, which has something to do with the fact that these four voiced consonants don't have an unvoiced counterpart).

Re: Part 1

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

Nope. Here's the rule: hard sign "ъ" is used only before "compound" vowels (я, е, ё, ю) to indicate that the preceeding consonant is not palatalized, while the vowel itself is yotized ([j] sound added). So, your hypothetical "дъа" is totally impossible combination, it's simply meaningless, so "ъ" is never used before а, и, о, у, ы and э. On the other hand, when soft sign "ь" occurs between a consonant and a vowel (again, usually "compound" one - the "ьо" and "ьи" exceptions are described below) it indicates that the preceeding consonant is palatalized and the following vowel is yotized. Finally, when there's neither hard nor soft sign between a consonant and a "compound" vowel (or "и"), it means that the precceding consonant is palatalized but the vowel is not yotized. So, here's the most frequent mistake of native English speakers: they say привъет instead of привет (i.e. they don't palatalize "v" but yotize "e" while it's supposed to be done vice versa). Just think of the difference between British "t" in "tin" (not palatalized) and "t" in "teen" (palatalized). Pronouncing "привет" as "привъет" is kinda like saying "tyin" insted of "teen". Now a few words about the exceptions - they're "ьо" and "ьи". Both combinations are found in loanwords (mostly French ones) only. In fact, "ьо" is identical to "ьё" (that we use in native words such as "сырьё" and "бельё"), and "ьи" combination has no native counterpart, it's supposed to be pronounced as "ьйи" - [ji] with the palatalization of the preceeding consonant. Examples: монсеньор - monseigneur , Монсиньи - Monsigni. Sorry for such a long and clumsy explanation.

Re: Part 1

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

Actually, "ы" in stems etymologically refers to Proto-Indo-European long "u". But in the word endings "ы" is a modified "и".

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

So, here's the most frequent mistake of native English speakers: they say привъет instead of привет (i.e. they don't palatalize "v" but yotize "e" while it's supposed to be done vice versa).

Are you saying that there's no [j] sound before the [e] in привет? I'm not expert so I'm a little hesitant to do this, but I have to disagree with you. I've heard a native speaker pronounce it as [privjet] and in this entry (http://www.livejournal.com/community/learn_russian/18671.html) people confirmed that привет is indeed pronounced privjet.

Re: Part 1

[ekeme-ndiba.livejournal.com]

No way, I'm a native speaker myself. Palatalization may be confused with yotization, if the speech is expressly overemphasized (and I think that's the case). But just keep in mind that in fact you have to add [j] only if a compund vowel (я, е, ё, ю) 1) starts a word or follows 2) another vowel or 3) hard/soft sign. In any other case these vowels only affect the quality of a preceeding consonant, staying unyotized themselves. The most confusing thing is that j/y's are often used in transliteration to represent palatalization.

Re: Part 1

[ugly-boy.livejournal.com]

Interesting, you should inform the other native speakers here (http://www.livejournal.com/community/learn_russian/18671.html) of this, because they seem to disagree with you.