Talk:Syllable

message: I removed belittled from the examples of syllables that end with three or four consonants.  Dictionary.com says it's be-lit-tled.  I substituted strength, which is one syllable. —Triskaideka 15:20, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: 'tled' is three consonants, though - t (dark-)l and d. 'Strength', on the other hand, (at least in most standard varieties of English) only two consonants clustered at the end: ng and th. (strength alone would qualify only if pronounced with a hard g, which, while I am aware this pronunciation exists, AFAIK it isn't standard in any English variety). strengths would qualify, though. Firejuggler86 (talk) 11:28, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

text: Funnily enough it does contain four sounds (k s th s), but not divided the same way as the letters. −Woodstone 16:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Remove belittled 

message: Does "sixths" really count as a syllable that ends in four consonant phonemes?  It's nearly impossible to say 'ksths'.  "Prompts", the other example given in the article, is a little easier, but still no one actually fully pronounces the "mpts" when they say the word.  Maybe "contexts" would be a better example.  Actually, scratch that, no one completely pronounces "ksts" either.  I think it's fair to say that English phonlology only allows three consonant sounds in a syllable coda.  Morphology may create impossible syllables, but those are simplified when used in spoken English.
:Certainly in fast speech, complex codas get simplified, but many people have no trouble pronouncing the full codas of sixths, prompts, and contexts in citation form. It's a bit of a stretch to assert that the full coda completely lacks the sounds that get simplified, when there are plenty of people who do pronounce them. There are probably many people who do reduce the codas even in citation form, so what we have is an example of idiolectical variation. Nohat 17:55, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sixths 

message: None of the external references are working, not atleast from my terminal. I suggest some editor, not from IIT Kharagpur, India check if the links are active and accessible.
VijitJain 15:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They all work for me in Berlin, Germany. Angr (talk • contribs) 15:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External references 

message: The Japanese language has only several hundred syllables, Mandarin has around 1280 syllables, and Vietnamese is capable of representing 6200 syllables. I propose an article that is a list of the number of possible syllables in each language.Badagnani 21:52, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article proposal 

message: Is "people" a one-syllable word? Many people pronounce the word "people" as a two-syllable word, although dictionaries regard it as a one-syllable word (IPA in the OED: [ˈpiːpl]). Which one is correct? One-syllable or two-syllable? --­ (talk) 02:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Two syllables. In full IPA there would be a syllabicity mark under the el in [ˈpiːpl], but the OED doesn't bother with it. kwami (talk) 23:20, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is "people" a one-syllable word? 

message: The mention of Japanese was unsourced and seemed to be skating on majorly thin ice, so I cut a few words out.  Explanation: first, /n/ does not end a coda.  /ɴ/ is the phoneme meant, but it's misleading to say /ɴ/ ends a coda anyway as it's timed as a separate mora.  In Japanese, a word root like /ka/, is half as short as /kaɴ/ (and this is crucial to pronunciation, and allows no leeway).  Since Japanese is mora-timed, it seems best to avoid this /ɴ/ issue, or if not, avoid Japanese altogether in this article.  My personal feeling is that, in Japanese, a mora equals a syllable, i.e. a syllable cannot be longer than a mora.
(Ejoty (talk) 09:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A mora does not equal a syllable in Japanese, and /N/ and the geminating chroneme (sometimes called "/Q/") prove it, since they are well-formed moras but not well-formed syllables. There's other evidence too: Junko Itô ("Prosodic minimality in Japanese", Proceedings of the Chicago Linguistic Society 26 (1990), 213-39) discusses how long loanwords in Japanese can be clipped down to two syllables - not necessarily two moras: e.g. /saNdoiti/ "sandwich" can be clipped to /saNdo/, but not */saN/ (likewise /saikederikku/ "psychedelic" can be clipped to /saike/, but not */sai/, because diphthongs are also two moras but not two syllables). +Angr 19:25, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

text: It's true that Japanese assigns one mora per note in singing, and the Japanese kana syllabaries are actually "mora-aries" because each character corresponds to a mora rather than a syllable, but that doesn't mean the concept of the "syllable" is nonexistent or non-useful for Japanese. If Japanese had no syllables, there would be no way to explain the distribution of /N/ and "/Q/" or to explain the truncation facts. I did add a reference for the claim that /N/ appears in the syllable coda; there isn't much more this article says or needs to say about it. More detail should go in Japanese phonology. +Angr 15:07, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

text: Moras are an interesting question in Japanese. How pertinent are they in non-literary situations? Are they a reification of the writing system, itself a product of historical changes where moraic /N/ and /Q/ derive from full CV syllables (at least in native words)? If a few centuries ago Japan had adopted an alphabet and lost its kana, and all mora-based poetry and song, would it be considered today anything other than a syllabic language? kwami (talk) 07:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

text: I should add here,  is right that Japanese is mora-timed in pronunciation, but the syllable is still an important concept. For example, the accent in a Japanese word can only fall on the beginning of a syllable. Benwing (talk) 20:33, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem in Syllables and phonotactic constraints 

message: It's been proposed that the stubs syllable onset, syllable nucleus, syllable coda, and syllable rime be merged here, so I'm opening discussion. — kwami (talk) 20:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: Might be a good idea to add a section discussing how languages can divide syllables into onset and rime (e.g., English) or into body and coda (e.g., Korean).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.189.24.161 (talk) 21:19, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean in writing, or phonological theory? — kwami (talk) 21:43, 11 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Body vs. Rime? 

message: The paragraph that gives examples of Hebrew and Arabic names would be greatly improved if someone could insert the IPA for the phonemes in Tiberian Hebrew and Quranic Arabic. Thanks.  — Solo Owl (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed.Benwing (talk) 20:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Phonotactic constraints

message: I came here from "vowel" to quickly find out what "nucleus" means.  I don't feel that "...every syllable contains a nucleus" explains very much. 202.179.16.64 (talk) 14:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed. Benwing (talk) 20:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Nucleus

message: With L and Mu both connected to a single leaf, the diagram isn't really a tree but a graph. A tree would have them both connected to separate nodes, perhaps both with the value of omega.
--bleeding_heart (talk) 21:41, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: All other diagrams in the section are "trees" read from top to bottom, so no arrows are needed. Only the one shown here is not. I agree with User:William Warner that this picture is confusing (or incorrect). Also, in the text not all its symbols are explained. It needs clarification or correction. −Woodstone (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tree diagram not really a tree... 

message: The term 'rime' is used throughout the article, but on graphical charts, the word is spelt 'rhyme'. This is in consistent.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.238.217.68 (talk) 12:56, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  inconsistency - rime and rhyme both on page 

message: The diagrams use the symbols C, V, H and T along with + and *. These are not described anywhere in the article. The only reference to them is the line: "This syllable can be abstracted as a consonant-vowel-consonant syllable, abbreviated CVC." in the Structure section.
Rhdunn (talk) 12:36, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Found a possible interpretation on the Standard Chinese phonology page, though they use G instead of H for the glide, and XT instead of T?C* for the coda and tone. 84.3.28.160 (talk) 05:30, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

text: Plus and asterisk are used as in regular expressions, i.e. they mean 1 or more instances and 0 or more, respectively. — Christoph Päper 10:09, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  CVHT definitions 

message: Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted.
Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia.
This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link.
If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting.
If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page.
If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta.
When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags.
The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true.
Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.
Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:
*http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/52/95/98/PDF/irl-ogami.pdf
*:Triggered by \bhalshs\.archives-ouvertes\.fr on the global blacklist
If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.
From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:23, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page 

message: Proto-Elamite, 3200 BC, Iraq. Not Sumerian. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19964786
I'd also idly point out that the analysis of bella coola is limited - there are multiple different theories about the structure of the language; some of them argue that bella coola has normal syllables, but a large range of possible extrasyllabic consonants, and thus has no vowel-less syllables; some of them argue that bella coola has unusually broad permitted nucleuses, including sonorants, and thus has no nucleus-less syllables. This article currently falsely suggests a single consensus in a complex field; not sure whether it needs expanding with a whole load more information, or something like reducing it to a very brief summary and linking it into Main Article: Bella Coola or something. 192.76.8.39 (talk) 19:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Earliest recorded syllables 

message: The section headed 'Coda' starts with what looks like the diagrammatic representation of a four-syllable utterance. It looks as if it ought to have a caption to explain what is represented - the reader has no way of figuring this out.  RoachPeter (talk) 10:10, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Phonetically that's true. Forgot about that. Phonemically, however, there's a good argument for max syllable being CyVN (and not much for the usual analysis of N and Q being distinct phonemes). It seems other Japonic languages have developed more CVC syllables. — kwami (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coda 

message: Thailand and Vietnam are not located in East Asia and there is no language group called "East Asian languages". One might think Japanese and Korean are tonal because their respective countries are in East Asia. --2.245.162.180 (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  East Asian languages like Chinese 

message: What is a complex coda?  I am a little curious.  Initially, I made an educated guess that a complex coda was a coda with more than one consonant.  However, from what I obtained from Labov, it seems that "can't" has a complex coda but "and" doesn't.LakeKayak (talk) 19:34, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Could somebody explain this to me?, because I seem lost.LakeKayak (talk) 02:53, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Complex coda 

message: The difference should be elucidated. Otherwise, the difference should be gotten rid of.
Mhark314 (talk) 12:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  If there is a reason for using the word rime in one place and rhyme in another... 

message: Many linguists know little about the physiology of speech.  Here I see nothing about the processes behind the formation of syllables.  Either they are seen as acoustic units, or they are seen as groups of phonemes.  These are two totally different concepts, neither of which can explain how syllables are formed.
'Chest pulse' or 'breath pulse' are key concepts. I find almost nothing about them, even in books devoted to the physiology of speech.  It is breath pulse which makes speech different to singing.  Is there anyone who knows more about this subject?Luo Shanlian (talk) 04:53, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: You might be interested in the following paper: On Subglottal Pulses. (We do probably need an article for this, even though all three of subglottal pulse, chest pulse, breath pulse have zero incoming links up 'til now.) --Trɔpʏliʊm • blah 17:19, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article and accompanying talk contain faults typical of linguistic debate 

message: More proper terminology would "Sinitic" or "Mainland Southeast Asian Sprachbund" Model  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoandri Dominguez Garcia (talk • contribs) 23:28, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Condescendence or cultural incorrectness of "Chinese Model" 

message: There is a lot wrong with the opening paragraph of the lead. The statement that "the use of both vowels and consonants creates a rhythmic punctuation" makes no sense, either literally or metaphorically. Equally meaningless is "Syllabic form arises from a principle ...". It is demonstrably false that "consonants are of short duration while vowels cand be of long duration": a recording of my pronunciation of the word 'fish', for example, shows time values of 320ms for the first consonant, 210ms for the vowel and 390 for the final consonant. I can't guess any meaning for the statement that vowels "are delivered with some restraint". It is not possible to understand what is meant by "In most modern languages, the usage of sounds is restricted to only consonants and vowels, avoiding clicks and whirrs", nor to see how this is relevant to the definition of the syllable. RoachPeter (talk) 20:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening paragraph 

message: I have two main problems with this article. 
Firstly, it doesn't really contain a definition of what a syllable even is. Like it talks about how a syllable is made of a nucleus and onset and coda, but why? Why do we define these things this way in the first place? I feel like there needs to be a more general definition for what a syllable is which *motivates* why we define it and describe it with this model. Something about how most languages exhibit these "peaks of sonority" (like if you analyse the voice recording), and this leads us to define "auditory/phonetic syllables". And then we also notice that the phonological and morphological rules of a language are often naturally expressed in terms of units which mostly correspond to the phonetic syllables, and we can call these units "phonological/morphological syllables", etc. Basically explain what syllables actually physically *are*, rather than just saying "syllables have an onset and coda (which are usually consonant sequences), and a nucleus (which is usually a vowel or syllablic consonant)". Give some phonetic and phonological motivation for the definitions. 
Secondly, it doesn't seem to mention the phenomenon in English where words like "fire", "real", "beer", "hour", "while", etc, can be analysed as either having 1 or 2 syllables. I've heard people often argue whether these words actually have 1 or 2 syllables. In fact, I would argue that depending on the person, these words *can* be pronounced as one syllable, as two syllables, or as something in between. (which shows that "syllable" is a fuzzy definition, just like everything in linguistics). The issue is whether the final /l/ and /r/ are the coda of the syllable, or the nucleus of their own syllable. 
Thus "fire" can be pronounced either as 1) /faɪ̯ɹ/ with the /ɹ/ acting as the coda of the syllable (or possibly the last part of the "triphthong" /aɪ̯ɹ/ if you want to analyse /ɹ/ as vowel-like), or 2) as /faɪ̯.(j)ɹ̩/, with /(j)ɹ̩/ being a second syllable. 
--AndreRD (talk) 15:36, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: We have to consider the possibility that the word "syllable" is meaningless in every language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.238.18 (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: A word can be meaningless even if it has been used for thousands of years.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.48.238.18 (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "syllable" and words with ambiguous number of syllables 

message: While some words do indeed begin with a phonemic glottal stop that doesn't get removed regardless of what comes before it, there are many words that begin with a vowel and a non-phonemic glottal stop that does get removed when preceded by another word. In Arabic, we call it ألف الوصل or "connecting alif". Examples of such words are the definite article ال /æl/, اسم /ɪsm/ "name", ابن /ɪbn/ "son", اثنان /ɪðnæ:n/ "two" and many others.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by RaphaelSantiago53 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arabic does NOT forbid empty onsets as stated in the null onset section 

message: A discussion is taking place to address the redirect :Syllable structure. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 25#Syllable structure until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 08:17, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Syllable structure" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: In addition, the stress mark ⟨ˈ⟩ is placed immediately...
Alas, it renders right under the brackets in some browsers.
OK, I'll  try adding a space:
 ⟨ˈ⟩ 
 ⟨ ˈ ⟩ 
 ⟨ ˈ⟩ 
 ⟨ˈ ⟩ 
OK, let's see how they render:
# ⟨ˈ⟩ 
# ⟨ ˈ ⟩
# ⟨ ˈ⟩ 
# ⟨ˈ ⟩  
Hmmm...
Jidanni (talk) 18:08, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Stress mark rendering