Talk:Gemination

message: Italian is mentioned, but no example. I'm not familiar with Italian.  Could anyone give an example?
:Example of what?--47.32.20.133 (talk) 17:36, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Vowel gemination is an oxymoron. The term gemination only applies to consonants. Rikat (talk) 19:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Russian does not distinguish between long and short consonants (or vowels, for that matter) in speech, but only in writing. I can say that as a native speaker.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.24.136.83 (talk) 13:26, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Disregard the comment above. I am native speaker too and definitely distinguish between long and short consonant in Russian. Though, it may drop in fast or children-like speech. All scientists recognize it.90.188.77.45 (talk) 20:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Russian phonology says that only  and  are actually geminated.  It may depend on dialect, though whatever the case may be it's definitely true that many instances of written double consonants don't indicate actual gemination in speech.  — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 00:01, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Russian

message: Info about gemination in Polish is false.
While polish language has geminates (double consonants) it is not a gemination. It should be always pronounced as two separate (repeated) consonats. Long vovels and long consonants does not exist in Polish.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.5.23.100 (talk) 20:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Polish 

message: The example of Japanese is exactly contrary - "came" = kitta, "cut (past)" = kita  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.84.134.174 (talk) 12:16, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I didn't change anything, but the article is currently correct. kuru 'come' is an irregular verb with past tense kita 'came'. kiru 'slice' is a godan verb that could be mistaken as ichidan with past tense kitta 'sliced'. Wikky Horse (talk) 17:53, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake 

message: Wolf Leslau used to give the word 'penknife' as a clear case of in-word gemination in English.Kdammers (talk) 01:24, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I pronounce it with . CodeCat (talk) 14:51, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  English gemination 

message: "With affricates, however, this does not occur. For instance: orange juice [ˈɒrɨndʒ.dʒuːs]" The English section says "this does not occur" with affricates, but then shows an instance in which gemination does, in fact, occur with affricates. I'm confused. 69.34.174.2 (talk) 21:51, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, that's a good question. It's confusing, as you say. I think perhaps it's because gemination of an affricate is supposed to result in doubled stop portion, rather than the whole affricate being repeated. So, if orange juice had gemination, it would be pronounced as  or  with the , the stop part of the affricate, doubled, instead of  where the whole affricate is repeated. So that might be why the article says affricates aren't geminated. — Eru·tuon 00:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Um? 

message: although several languages feature both independently (as in Arabic, Japanese, Finnish, and Estonian), or have interdependent vowel and consonant length (as in Norwegian and Swedish).81.11.230.198 (talk) 12:41, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  wordinhasprob 

message: [bː] appears to be a /mb/ just as /tː/ appears to be /nt/ GamerGeekWiki (talk) 02:57, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geminized stops seem to have nasals ie. [bː] vs /mb/ 

message: The article mentions the Finnish word-final archiphonemic glottal stop, which lengthens the first consonant of the following word. The example given is:
|otaʔ se| > ota se "take it!"
This looks wrong because the lengthening of the /s/ is not shown. Should it be:
|otaʔ se| > otas se "take it!"
or something like that? Jan Arvid Götesson (talk) 10:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know Finnish well enough to vouch for the example, but it looks like a classic case of assimilation producing a geminate phonetic outcome: /ˈotaʔ se/ → [ˈotasːe]. If that's the case (and if phonemic /ʔ/ is accurate), it's useful as an example of one source of phonetic geminates in Finnish.--47.32.20.133 (talk) 17:04, 6 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with Finnish example 

message: In 40 years of doing both synchronic and diachronic phonology, I don't recall ever encountering the term consonant elongation. I've changed it to consonant lengthening, which in my experience is standard terminology as a frequent alternative to gemination (or, phonetically, a specific type with regard to manner of articulation). If there are arguments in favor of preferring consonant elongation, please present them here.47.32.20.133 (talk) 13:43, 1 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  consonant elongation, consonant lengthening 

message: Phonetics/phonology: It's not all that difficult to find languages in which geminates are underlying, don't surface phonetically long, but do surface as phonetically distinct from underlying non-geminates. (And, of course, phonologists will quibble about whether the underlying form really is a geminate, with evidence usually leaning in the direction of yes, it is.)
And, unless the topic is intended to be purely phonetic only...
Geminate/gemination: This is more serious to the basic purpose of the article in that the two are conflated at various points and readers can be left confused and/or misinformed. Basic example: the frequent pronunciation of English prime minister as [ˌpraɪˈmɪnɪstər] is a case of degemination /mm/ → [m], whereas [ˌpraɪmˈmɪnɪstər] is a straightforward projection /mm/ → [mː], not a case of anything (/mm/ or /m/) undergoing gemination. A geminate is a form, whether phonological or phonetic, whereas gemination is a process; a phonetic geminate may or may not be the result of (synchonic) gemination. (Vocalic correlates of the principle process/non-process would be raising in /e/ → [i], no raising in /i/ → [i].) A phonological geminate is a geminate, e.g. Italian /ˈfatto/. If that's pronounced [ˈfatːo], as it normally is, in what sense does gemination occur? None: phonological geminate /tt/ projects as phonetic geminate [tː]. Sticking with Italian, non-stress-conditioned RS does normally involve gemination: /a ˈkasa/ 'at home' and /la ˈkasa/ 'the house' normally surface with distinct realizations of /k/: [aˈkːaːsa], [laˈkaːsa] with no source for [kː] identifiable synchronically (other than noting that preposition a triggers RS). Gemination can occur diachronically, such as Latin /ˈfemina/ > Italian /ˈfemmina/; once the form is accepted as /ˈfemmina/, the pronunciation [ˈfemːina] with phonetic geminate no longer reflects a process of gemination (just as /i/ → [i] does not instantiate raising). There's no need to get deeply into the technical weeds for the article, but it should be possible to execute clarifications for a general readership not steeped in phonetics or phonology, and by doing so also reveal phenomena of interest to them. --47.32.20.133 (talk) 16:46, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two problems haunt this article: phonetics/phonology, geminate/gemination 

message: At present the article says that gemination is not phonemic in English because "there is no minimal pair in English that differs by gemination". I think that is misleading. I doubt that there is any pair of individual words or common phrases that differ only in presence or absence of gemination, but it is perfectly possible to have a pair of phrases where gemination is the only difference. For example, consider "Will Pat trick the driver?" and "Will Patrick the driver arrive soon?"I shall therefore remove the comment about there being no minimal pair, while leaving the statement that gemination is not phonemic. JBW (talk) 14:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gemination in English 

message: Neapolitan has no consonant length / gemination at words beginning. It occurs only when the word is preceded by a vowel, which always happens, since no words are pronounced without a preceding article or particle. It actually works mostly identically to spoken Italian with the plus of the strong presence of "schwa" in Neapolitan, which influences the following consonants as a vowel. The main distinctive feature, if compared to spoken Italian, is the irregularity of gemination at words beginning in Neapolitan, which occurs with o lot a small nuances, making a correct pronounce of the language difficult even for Italian speakers trying to learn it.
Ex: 
the house: a casa, pronounce a kasə
The houses: e case, pronunce e k:kasə
My phonetic transcription is surely erroneous, but it can give an idea. 
I'm a Neapolitan native speaker.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.210.189.112 (talk) 10:05, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neapolitan 

message: It's misleading to not mention that roommate [ˈrum.meɪt] and prime minister [ˌpɻaɪmˈmɪnɪstəɹ] can be variable [V.mV] or [Vm.mV] for the same speaker. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 20:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  roommate and prime minister vary with regard to phonetic length of /-m#m-/ 

message: The author of the article cited takes care to distinguish between geminates and partial assimilations. All of these are partial assimilations, not geminates:
/l/ or /r/ + /s/ 	> 	/d/ + /s/: 	[ds] 	fa[ds]a), du[ds]e 	(Sp. falsa or farsa, dulce)
/l/ or /r/ + /p/ 	> 	/d/ + /p/: 	[b˺p] 	cu[b˺p]a, cue[b˺p]o 	(Sp. culpa, cuerpo)
/l/ or /r/ + /t/ 	> 	/d/ + /t/: 	[d˺t] 	sue[d˺t]e, co[d˺t]a 	(Sp. suelte or suerte, corta)
/l/ or /r/ + /tʃ/ 	> 	/d/ + /tʃ/: [d˺tʃ] 	co[d˺tʃ]a, ma[d˺tʃ]arse (Sp. colcha or corcha, marcharse)
/l/ or /r/ + /k/ 	> 	/d/ + /k/: 	[g˺k] 	vo[g˺k]ar, ba[g˺k]o 	(Sp. volcar, barco) 
There's a second problem in the entire list in that the author of the article cited has to indulge in more than just a bit of phonological jiggery-pokery to come up with the analysis that the liquid constituent of the cluster has restructured diachronically to /d/. Okay, perhaps, for the purposes of his article, but the two steps of first a restructuring to /d/, then /d/ assimilating partially or entirely at the phonetic level is not clarified at all here in Wikipedia, where the description above the list is phonetic: ".../l/ and /ɾ/ in syllabic coda are assimilated to the following consonant", with no mention of the intervening /l/ or /r/ > /d/. Given all this, a good cleanup is definitely in order. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 21:37, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five sets listed for Cuban Spanish are not geminates 

message: The article claims that bevve is pronounced  [ˈbevːe] whereas beve is [ˈbeːve].  I don't think that's quite correct.  I think the first syllable of bevve actually uses the "open" e ([ɛ]) so it should be [ˈbɛvːe].  To be sure, the passato remoto was rare in the part of Italy I was in so I'm not super-sure of this. --Trovatore (talk) 01:32, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  bevve