Help talk:IPA/Slovak

<d, t, n, l> before <e, i, í>

Are <d, t, n, l> before <e, i, í> always pronounced like <ď, ť, ň, ľ>? Bratislava and Štefan are transcribed as [ˈbracislaʋa] and [ˈʃcɛfan] respectively, while Rastislav Štefánik is transcribed as [ˈrastislaw ˈʃtefaːɲik]. Also, Martikán is transcribed as [ˈmarcɪkaːn], but Martin Škrtel is transcribed as [ˈmartɪn ˈʃkr̩cɛl] (Why not [ˈmarcɪn]?). And what about other words like Vittek, Stanislav, Škriniar, Kornel? --Potapt (talk) 00:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Potapt: To be honest... I'm not sure. There definitely are some exceptions.

- Reverted anon's edit to Milan Rastislav Štefánik, because the pronunciation with [c] has been confirmed to be correct by a native speaker (see above).

- I wouldn't ask questions like "why not [ˈmarcɪn]" - it's just the way it's pronounced, that's it.

- I checked YouTube/Forvo:

- Róbert Vittek: short alveolar [t], so [ˈroːbert ˈʋitek]

- Stanislav Šesták: palatal [ɲ], so [ˈstaɲislaw ˈʃestaːk]

- Milan Škriniar: probably alveolar [n] (that's what I hear on Forvo), so [ˈmilan ˈʃkriniar] - remember that [ia] is a rising diphthong. We need a confirmation from a native speaker though, @Radoslav Ivan: are you there? :)

- Kornel Saláta: alveolar [n], so [ˈkornel ˈsalaːta]. Mr KEBAB (talk) 14:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: @Potapt: In most words, <d, t, n> (I don't want to include <l>, since in modern Slovak you would hardly hear someone pronounce it as a palatal sound <ľ> before <e, i, í>, though purists insist on it) are palatalised before <e, i, í> (as well as before <ia, ie, iu>). When it comes to proper nouns however, many exceptions occur.

Here is a list featuring all the names mentioned above, with their correct pronunciations:

- Bratislava: [ˈbracislaʋa]

- Štefan Banič: [ˈʃcefan ˈbaɲit͡ʃ]

- Milan Rastislav Štefánik: [ˈmilan ˈrascislaw ˈʃcefaːɲik]

- Michal Martikán: [ˈmixal ˈmartikaːn]

- Martin Škrtel: [ˈmartin ˈʃkr̩cel]

- Róbert Vittek: [ˈroːbert ˈʋitek]

- Stanislav Šesták: [ˈstaɲislaw ˈʃestaːk]

- Milan Škriniar: [ˈmilan ˈʃkriɲiar]

- Kornel Saláta: [ˈkornel ˈsalaːta] Radoslav Ivan (talk) 19:12, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: Thanks. Regarding the <ľ> sound, I've heard that it's practically nonexistent in Standard Bratislava speech, being replaced by hard <l> in all positions. Is that true? If so, we might want to include that here and on Slovak phonology. Mr KEBAB (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: Yes, speakers of western (Bratislava) dialects tend to pronounce a hard <l> instead of a soft <ľ> in all places (not just before <e, i, í>). This feature is often present on television and radio as well. Radoslav Ivan (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: Added, thanks. Last question (copy-pasted from above): does the word-initial /v/ cause the preceding word-final voiceless obstruent to voice, or does it stay voiceless? Mr KEBAB (talk) 20:57, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you both for your replies. --Potapt (talk) 19:09, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

If I could ask for more, are double letters (for example, tt as in Vittek) always pronounced as one, single sound in Slovak? --Potapt (talk) 19:21, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

1.) Yes, the word-initial /v/ causes the preceding word-final voiceless obstruent to voice, e.g. "les vonia" [lez voɲia].

2.) No, they aren't always pronounced as a single sound. I tried to find a rule for that, but I think there is none. For example, in the word "mäkký" just one k is pronounced: [mekiː]. In the name "Anna", both n's are pronounced, but I'm not sure how to write it's pronunciation, [anna], [an.na] or [anːa]. Radoslav Ivan (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. Mr KEBAB (talk) 14:52, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: Can you help me with the pronunciation of Michal Mertiňák? Is it [ˈmixal ˈmertiɲaːk] or [ˈmixal ˈmerciɲaːk]? Mr KEBAB (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

And with Daniela Hantuchová, please? Is it [ˈdaɲiela ˈɦantuxoʋaː] or [ˈdaniela ˈɦantuxoʋaː]? I think it's the former. Mr KEBAB (talk) 08:26, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: I'm not sure about Michal Mertiňák, because I've never heard of him, nor of such a surname. But I would pronounce it as [ˈmixal ˈmertiɲaːk]. But I can confirm that Daniela is always [ˈdaɲiela], so the right pronunciation is [ˈdaɲiela ˈɦantuxoʋaː]. Radoslav Ivan (talk) 11:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: Thanks! Do you think that we should reinstate the IPA on Michal Mertiňák? Mr KEBAB (talk) 12:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: I would perhaps leave it without pronunciation, just for now. Radoslav Ivan (talk) 17:45, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: That makes sense. We should be sure of its correctness. Mr KEBAB (talk) 17:50, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

/l/

Aren't there three pronunciations here:

• [ɫ] standard
• [l] after i/í, e
• [ʎ] when written as <ľ>

So that labuť, lipa and ľad have three different l-sounds? Mulder1982 (talk) 19:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

@Mulder1982: In standard pronunciation, the velarized and non-velarized /l/'s are in free variation with each other, it's just that the velarized realization is more common. We transcribe both of them [l] for simplicity, and because they're non-contrastive. Also, in Bratislava and cities nearby, /ʎ/ is missing because it merges with /l/, and so those dialects have only one lateral sound. Mr KEBAB (talk) 19:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Examples for [r, r̩]

I think these are wrong:

• similar to water (US) - bolded is "t", example is about "r" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.212.27.58 (talk) 09:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

The bolded "t" is an alveolar tap, so the example is correct. Mr KEBAB (talk) 08:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Help talk:IPA which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Front rounded vowels

@Radoslav Ivan: Hi again. What's the status of the front rounded vowels /y, yː, œ, œː/ in Slovak? Does anyone produce them with any consistency? If so, we should add them to the guide. For instance, is the name Norbert Gyömbér pronounced [ˈnɔrbɛrd ˈɟœmbɛːr] by at least a sizable minority of speakers? Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 14:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Perhaps some people may produce these sounds, especially if they want to sound more educated. However, they are not common sounds in Slovak and I don't think they are worth mentioning in the guide. Then we could also think about adding /ɣ/ to the guide, because someone might pronounce the "g" in "gouda" as /ɣ/, although that rarely happens. Radoslav Ivan (talk) 21:16, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

@Radoslav Ivan: Ok, thanks. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 19:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

English approximation of palatals

I have just noticed that the palatals [c ɟ] have inconsisitent English approximations: "skew" and "somewhat like job". Is there a reason for that? In the Hungarian and Czech keys, the palatals [c ɟ] are approxiomated with English /ty/ and /dy/ (e.g. "stew (UK)" and "dew (UK)" in the Czech key). –Austronesier (talk) 20:15, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Retroflexes

Why are we now claiming š ž to be retroflex /ʂ ʐ/, and č dž to be /tʂ dʐ/ (wouldn't they be /ʈʂ ɖʐ/ if this were true?) when both sources cited on this help page, including one from the freaking International Phonetic Association, use /ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ/? – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC) Pinging @Radoslav Ivan:, @Kbb2: and @Sol505000: as I think really this far-reaching change should have been discussed. The diff is this one and I must disagree with the reasoning. 1) "to align the transcription with other Slavic languages (Polish, Russian)" - Slovak is not Polish or Russian, and not all Slavic phonologies use retroflex sibilants. 2) We don't use the Czechoslovak phonetic alphabet anywhere on en.wikipedia, so the fact that ʒ stands for /dz/ in it is a moot point. 3) the source mentioned says "the IPA symbols /ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ/ are usually employed" so I see no benefit in us not doing the same thing, even though some speakers of Slovak surely do realise them as apical or even retroflex. Our approach to IPA transcription should follow what RS do. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 10:32, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Filelakeshoe: Sorry, the ping didn't work. You realize that almost no source uses the retroflex symbols for Polish and Russian, right? JIPA describes the sounds as retroflex and so we should either transcribe them as such or restore ⟨ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ⟩ for Slovak as well as Polish and Russian. I see no reason to give a special treatment to any of those. Sol505000 (talk) 09:41, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

This topic certainly is a bit more dodgier. But as the author Pavlík (2004) stated in his work, the important part is that they are apical (articulated with the very tip of the tongue) and (ideally) postalveolar, but as long as they are not laminal they could be in theory alveolar as well but then they would sound a bit off but still not too far from the goal, but still off. They really do not have such a long way to be truly retroflex since you definitely need to bend the tongue backward a bit there, although it seems a bit too rigid and exhausting if I were to go out of my way to bend the tongue more than is needed to touch (or almost touch) the alveolar ridge (or mainly its parts further from the teeth) with the tip of the tongue. So we could say that the realization can go from being (kind of) retroflex to being apical postalveolar, but since we do not have a source stating such an interval, I would suggest to change it to what the source says, apical postalveolar and/or try to find more sources on the topic. I could ask the National Language Institute here in Slovakia, but they are usually "occupied", so I do not guarantee anything... Aurel1510 (talk) 11:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

The JIPA article "Slovak" says that those are the same retroflex sounds found in Polish and Russian. Hamann, the co-author of that article, is the author of Retroflex fricatives in Slavic languages, one of the articles we're basing the usage of the retroflex symbols in our transcriptions of Polish and Russian. Sol505000 (talk) 07:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

@Sol505000 @Aurel1510 @Filelakeshoe The arguments in favour of so called retroflex in Slovak are in fact rather weak.

• Hunlíková & Hamann in the IPA illustration of Slovak mension Pavlík and the apicality of the sounds in question and that they "could therefore be described as retroflex" on that basis and refers to Hamann 2004 (Retroflex fricatives in Slavic languages") for more. Broad transcription uses palatoalveolars ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ.
• First of all Slovak is not mentioned explicitly in Hamann 2004. But Hamann gives a following articulatory definition of retroflexion. , p. 56, "Summing up the articulatory criteria for retroflex fricatives, they are all articulated behind the alveolar ridge, show a sub-lingual cavity, are articulated with the tongue tip (though this is not always discernible in the x-ray tracings), and with a retracted and flat tongue body."
• Hamann in The Phonetics and Phonology of Retroflexes for argues for non-occurrence of retroflexes in front vowel context p.94. She does not mention Slovak but for Czech she concludes that there is no conclusive arguments for retroflexivity and refers to Hamann 2003
• Hamann in Postalveolar Fricatives in Slavic Languages as Retroflexes again does not mention Slovak, she says on Czech "it cannot be clearly determined whether Czech has a retroflex fricative or no".
• Let's evaluate Pavlík (2004:103) using Hmann's definition. He mentions "postalveolarity" and "apicality". Both probably amount to the presence of a sub-lingual cavity. However, he does not comment on the shape of the tongue at all, so no direct evidence for retroflexion. Rather narrow transcription uses ʃ̺ ʒ̺ tʃ̺ dʒ̺
• The sources in Pavlík's bibliography do elaborate on the shape of the tongue. He quotes Dvončová, Jenča & Kráľ (1969): Atlas slovenských hlások where a x-ray image of sounds in question clearly show that the tongue arches towards the hard plate. (Tabuľka 40, 41, 42, 43) The descriptions of the sounds indicate that as well. e.g. š p. 89 "Chrbát jazyka sa obyčajne dvíha v miernom obúku k podnebiu a z veľkej častti vypĺňa ústnu dutinu." (The dorsum of the tongue typically rises in a gentle arch towards the palate, occupying a significant portion of the oral cavity.), č p. 90 "Chrbát jazyka stúpa šikmo pod podnebný oblúk." (The dorsum of the tongue rises obliquely/diagonally under the palatal arch.". These descriptions are consistent with weak palatalization of palato-alveolars ʃ, ʒ. Further Pavlík quotes Hála's Fonetické obrazy hlásek, where Hála equates Slovak š, ž with that of Czech. A schematic x-ray image shows again a bunched up tongue albeit somewhat less than the x-ray in the Atlas. Dvončová, Jenča & Kráľ (1969) mentions as well a less often used tip down articulation i.e. laminal articulation, this is exemplified by a palatogram and a linguogram in Tabuľka 62. A similar tip down (laminal) articulation is typical for English palatoalveolars is mentioned by Pavlík.
• Kráľ in Pravidlá slovenkej výslovnosti, 1988 p.76-78 gives similar descriptions and x-ray images that indicate a palatoalveolar articulation.
• Żygis, Marzena (2003) "Phonetic and Phonological Aspects of Slavic Sibilant Fricatives" concludes "both articulatory and phonological evidence show that the sibilants in Czech and Slovak are postalveolar ʃ and ʒ and not retroflex as in Polish, Russian or Lower Serbian." She gives a similar argument about the shape of the tongue and illustrates this with Pauliny et al. (1968:84). She gives as well a phonological argument, ʃ and ʒ regularly combine with a front vowel [i], in contrast to assumed incompatibility assumed by Hamann. She uses ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ for broad and narrow transcriptions. She specifically mentions that her conclusion is different than that of Hamann.
• Rubach in The lexical phonology of Slovak lists IPA equivalents of š ž č ǯ as ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ and characterizes them as postalveolar.

Given none of the sources uses ʂ ʐ tʂ dʐ but ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ, Hamann's retroflexity claim is not substantiated in her other works where she never mentions Slovak, and she never even claims retroflexivity for the closely related Czech, Żygis' evaluation of Hanam's definition shows a lack of retroflexivity, descriptions and x-rays of articulation that indicate a (weakly palatalized) palato-alveolar articulation, can we please revert to ʃ ʒ tʃ dʒ and align Slovak to Czech, and not with Polish and Russian where there are arguments for using ʂ ʐ tʂ dʐ and sources that use it. Qerez (talk) 06:58, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Consonants - c & ɟ Palatal Plosives instead of tɕ & dʑ Alveolo-Palatal Affricates

@Sol505000: I understand, the discussion is important, even if I felt that there was nothing to discuss about the symbols themselves, there is actually a bigger problem, like there being loads of other pages out there that need similar updates and stuff. So, what do you suggest? Aurel1510 (talk) 07:16, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Aurel1510: Sorry, I had an emergency and I had to leave for a couple of days. Let's keep the discussion on Talk:Slovak phonology. Sol505000 (talk) 06:31, 6 December 2021 (UTC)