Talk:Dahalo language

message: The first paragraph of the article says 3000 people:
Dahalo is an endangered South Cushitic language spoken by about 3000 people in Kenya.
However, the box to the right says 400. Which is correct? Mga 01:25, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch. There are at most 400 speakers now (cf. Brenzinger 1992, Tosco 1992). I've changed it. — mark ✎ 07:51, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Number of speakers

message: It says in the article that Dahalo is perhaps the only language to employ all four airstream mechanisms used in human language. What about Xhosa for example? --Midjungards (talk) 15:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right, Xhosa uses plosion, implosion, ejective, and velaric mechanisms.  I'll edit the sentence. (Taivo (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That might be a theoretical difference. Xhosa is often represented with the ejectives being phonetic detail. However, you can't do that with Dahalo. kwami (talk) 18:55, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Personally, I think that the "X language is unique" comments are pretty lame in linguistics.  Just as soon as one is published, it's contradicted in the literature by half a dozen people who say, "Uh, no, this language does that, too."  (I've written "Uh, no" articles myself.)  Since some sources treat the Xhosa ejectives as subphonemic and others treat them as phonemic, it's best to take the "uniqueness" tag off Dahalo I think.  Zulu also has the same four way distinction as Xhosa (although the ejectives may be subphonemic there as well).  But within Khoisan, !Xu also has a phonemic four-way. (Taivo (talk) 20:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It has implosives? Do you have refs? Or were you referring to s.t. else? kwami (talk) 01:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Snyman, Jan W.  1970.  An Introduction to the !Xu (!Kung) Language.  Cape Town:  A.A. Balkema. (Sorry my response is so much later than your question, I must have been ignoring my watchlist or something.) (Taivo (talk) 05:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Airstream mechanism

message: The consonant chart uses a slightly different symbol for the alveolar apical plosives that is not the symbol usually used for alveolar plosives. For example, the alveolar apical voiceless plain plosive, the symbol used is t̠. Perhaps the proper pronounciation of that phoneme could be explained, or a wiki link created to an explanatory page (if one already exists). Thanks.
— Jclu (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The consonant chart looks like it was taken straight from the Maddieson et al. article in the references section (I've added a link) - the apical diacritic is the same one they use. They refer to the stops as dental & alveolar, though (not apical & laminal); that may be why they used a non-standard symbol?  WmGB (talk) 19:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: So the symbol denotes apical pronounciation? Thanks; good to know. — Jclu (talk) 22:30, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, it's a retraction symbol, the point being that it's further back than the laminal dentals. They say that these are almost retroflex, that is, they're verging on post-alveolar, so the retraction symbol is appropriate. kwami (talk) 10:37, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Question on IPA symbol in consonant chart

message: Tosco 1992?  This needs a complete reference.  (Taivo (talk) 12:29, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Reference 

message: It seems given the number of speakers and the fact that children are not learning it, "moribound" may be a more accurate characterization than "endangered". Does anyone have a source for either one? Joefromrandb (talk) 05:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's moribund once children are no longer learning it. I'm not sure that's the case, though it would seem that there are not very many children learning it. — kwami (talk) 05:39, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endangered?