Talk:Swedish phonology

message: The retroflexations [ʂ], [ʈ], [ɳ] and [ɖ], ought to be regarded as phonemes (/ʂ/, /ʈ/, /ɳ/ and /ɖ/), since they are crucial (in standard central Swedish as well as most regiolects of Swedish) to tell differences like in the following pairs. I.e. there is true phonemic splitting in the pairs below:
Some oppostions involving /ɳ/
vara /`vɑːra/ ('be'), varna /`vɑːɳa/ ('warn', 'tip off'), vana (/`vɑːna/) ('habit') 
Tor /tuːr/ (boy's name), torn /tuːɳ/ ('rook', 'tower'), ton /tuːn/ ('tone')
kor /kuːr/ ('cow's'), korn /kuːɳ/ ('barley'; 'grain'), kon /kuːn/ ('cone')
hor /tuːr/ ('prostitution'), horn /huːɳ/ ('antler'), hon /huːn/ ('the sink')
Some oppostions involving /ʂ/
far /fɑːr/ ('father'), fars /fɑːʂ/  ('father's'), fas /fɑːs/ ('phase')
mor /muːr/ ('mother'), mors /muːʂ/ ('mother'), mos /muːs/ ('mashed potatoes')
kor /kuːr/ ('cows'), kors /kuːʂ/ ('cows'), kos /muːs/ ('cow's')
Some oppostions involving /ɖ/ and /ʈ/
mor /muːr/ ('mother'), mord /muːɖ/ ('murther'), mod /muːd/ ('courage')
torr /tɔrː/ ('dry'), torrt /tɔʈː/ ('dry'), Tott /tɔtː/ (an old cartoon figure 'Knoll och Tott')
vår /voːr/ ('our'), vårt /voːʈ/ ('our'), våt /voːt/ ('wet')
våra /`voːra/ ('our' pl.), vårta /`voːʈa/ ('wart'), våta /`voːta/ ('wet' pl.)
bor /buːr/ ('live', 'reside'), bord /buːɖ/ ('table'), bod /buːd/ ('shed')
Failing to distinguish mod ('courage') from mord ('murther'), unequivocally changes the meaning of a message... All the examples above show that there is true phonemic opposition between /ʂ/, /ʈ/, /ɳ/, /ɖ/ and the corresponding consonants, respectively. Also, it shows that the phonemic oppositions are not a marginal phenomenon, but a frequently recurring one.
Also, if comparing with the treatment of English some consonant clusters are always treated as individual phonemes (/tʃ/ and /dʒ/) despite that the difference between /t/ + /ʃ/ vs. /tʃ/ is arguable much smaller than in Swedish between /s/ and /ʂ/ and is not truly phonemic in i meaning-splitting sense.
Furthermore, the phonemic status of /ʂ/ is strengthened by the fact that in standard central Swedish (and actually in all of Sweden except the most southern provinces), dusch /dɵʂ/ ('shower') rhymes with kurs /kɵʂ/ ('course').
Sylvaticum (talk) 13:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Moreover, the distinction between /n/ /ŋ/ and /g/ works in a highly similar way: tugga /`tɵga/ ('chew'), tunga /`tɵŋa/ ('tongue'), tunna /`tɵna/ ('barrel'). Since /ŋ/ is regarded as a distinct phoneme, /ʂ/, /ʈ/, /ɳ/ and /ɖ/ ought to be regarded as that as well. Sylvaticum (talk) 14:07, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

text: In addition to previous discussion on this talk page, both above this and in archive, there's also an overview of Swedish phonology published in 2014 by Tomas Riad which mentions the retroflexes, not promoting them to phonemes but instead mentions it as part of a sandhi rule on pp. 73-79.  Riad also does the opposite of the consensus elsewhere, by promoting /ʂ/ as a phoneme and treats the various allophones of [ɧ] within that phoneme.  Note, however that [ʂ] from /r/+/s/ is treated as a sandhi-related allophone - something already mentioned in the article with different source citations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.10.82.67 (talk) 16:10, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: He doesn't assign -the-retroflex-rs a phonemic status.  is his transcription of what is (perhaps) more commonly written with  in the literature. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 08:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why not phonemic status of the retroflexations? 

message: I feel like I'm blind, as I can't find any mentions of /d/ turning into rhotics in certain words, other than  in the article about Dental and alveolar taps and flaps.
Anyway, sentences like "Vad sa du?" often get pronounced (pardon my IPA)  in colloquial speech, enough to warrant a mention on LearningSwedish.se.
So, eh... what to say about it?
OliviaEljest (talk) 04:17, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  /d/ into /r/ or /ɾ/ 

message: As the title says, I think the ɵ sound should be in the close-mid category and not the open-mid.
I think this chart speaks for itself:
Swedish phonology#/media/File:Swedish monophthongs chart.svg
The ɵ sound is almost right in the middle but a little closer to close vowels, and certainly not open-mid as @Fdom5997 insists on. Pol Cəl (talk) 07:56, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Phonemically, yes it is close-mid, but phonetically (and as also described in the chart) it is slightly lowered, as more open. Fdom5997 (talk) 08:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually in the chart it's slightly raised* not slightly lowered. Take a ruler out and try to measure it, it's CLEARLY close-mid both phonetically and phonemically, as long as we're looking at the same chart :File:Swedish monophthongs chart.svg Pol Cəl (talk) 14:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not phonemically close-mid but close. It's the short counterpart of . Phonetically, it is as low as  and , being true-mid, right in-between close-mid and open-mid. Sol505000 (talk) 14:39, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

text: If the sound is phonetically lowered (as addressed per source), then yes it is technically *closer* to being considered open-mid, but it is not considered to be close-mid, however; it is still phonologically transcribed as a close-mid, central, rounded vowel. Fdom5997 (talk) 20:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  I think the ɵ sound should be in the close-mid category 

message: The article states, right at the beginning, that "Swedish also features consonant clusters not seen in other Germanic languages such as the "kv" consonant cluster and the "kn" consonant cluster." As far as I can tell, this is simply wrong. If no-one can convince me otherwise, I will delete the sentence. See, amongst others:
* Norwegian: kvinne, knapp
* Danish: kvinde, knap
* Faroese: kvinna, knappur
* Icelandic: kvinna, knappur
* German: quälen /ˈkvɛːlən/, Knecht
* Dutch and North Frisian: knecht
* Saterland Frisian: Knächt
* West Frisian: knjocht
etc.
Tynnoel (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  kv and kn 

message: I am somewhat bewildered by the signs marking stress and pitch accent in this article. They do not seem to be IPA. Is the author not satisfied with IPA's standards? 109.104.19.6 (talk) 06:45, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stress and pitch accent