Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Talk:Labial consonant

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 14 years ago by EsB in topic Adding a table of contents

Lack of labials?

[edit]

Are there any languages that lack labials? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.158.68.138 (talk) 18:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Yes, for example the Na-Dené languages Tlingit and Eyak typically lack labials (though /m/ may now occasionally occur due to the influence of English). These aren't the only examples, but I'd have to search for others. When I have time, I'll add a reference in the article. --JorisvS (talk) 13:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Distinction

[edit]

From the current (last mod: 11:31, 22 January 2010) revision:

Very few languages, however, make a distinction purely between bilabials and labiodentals, making "labial" usually a sufficient specification of a language's phonemes. One language that does make such a distinction is Ewe, having both kinds of fricatives, though the labiodentals are produced with greater articulatory force.

I feel like there are countless distinctions between bilabials and labiodentals - English /v/ and /b/ for starters. Considering only fricatives, as the second sentence does, perhaps few or no languages need a distinction, but I think this is misleading otherwise. catParade 04:37, 1 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

The difference between English /b/ and /v/ is not primarily one between a bilabial and a labiodental, but between a plosive and a fricative: If I were to pronounce English /v/ as /β/ you would have no trouble understanding me, meaning it's sufficient to classify both as "labial". This is exactly what is said in that sentence: "few languages make a distinction purely between bilabials and labiodentals", which excludes bilabial vs. labiodental as a secondary feature like in English, but does not focus exclusively on fricatives [Though the only phonemic bilabial vs. labiodental distinction I know of is one between fricatives]. It specifically focuses on all of the following distinctions: /p/ vs. /p̪/, /b/ vs. /b̪/, /p͡ɸ/ vs. /p̪͡f/, /b͡β/ vs. /b̪͡v/, /m/ vs. /ɱ/, /ɸ/ vs. /f/, /β/ vs. /v/, /β̞/ vs. /ʋ/, /ѵ̟/ vs. /ѵ/, and /ʙ/ vs. /ʙ̪/. --JorisvS (talk) 11:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Adding a table of contents

[edit]

I think adding a table of contents would help readers better understand what consonants are related to this article. A table as such would especially help those who are more familiar with the diffrent consonants represented by the IPA symboles.

The article contains a table as such in other languages in wikipedia.EsB (talk) 21:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)Reply