Talk:No audible release

message: I've just edited the Korean language article:
:Only seven consonant allophones are found at the end of syllables:  and . They are all unreleased.
 and  are certainly stops, whether they be oral or nasal stops. But I don't think I've ever heard /l/ being mentioned as a stop. But fianl /l/ sounds unreleased to me, at least in Korean and English. It sounds released to me in the French pronunciation of the word elle.
So I want to ask if unreleased laterals are also possible. Is that true?
Am I onto something, or am I confused? --KJ 06:21, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The phonemes  are not normally considered stops. Release is only meaningful for a stop. If there is no occlusion, how can it be released? In French elle, there is a shwa after the l.  −Woodstone 13:44, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. I was confused about the occlusion bit, and was just thinking about "articulators staying in touch" as in Korean. --Kjoonlee 14:20, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

text: There is no schwa after the l in elle, http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/elle#French Perhaps you are thinking of Italian ella. 99.236.215.170 (talk) 18:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There is, it's just non-phonemic. That's what (s)he means by the term "released". Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Only stops?

message: The diacritic is supposed to follow the consonant, not be placed on top of it. See the IPA chart here: http://www.langsci.ucl.ac.uk/ipa/diacritics.html  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.151.171.95 (talk) 13:33, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's a combining character. It comes (or should come) after a d cos there's nowhere else for it to go, I suppose. It'd look ridiculous on top of the ascender. — Lfdder (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Surely the important thing is the way phoneticians use it, not whether Unicode classifies it as a combining character? If you do a Google Books search for "unreleased stop" you'll see many, many examples in which the diacritic follows the consonant (including consonants with no ascender, such as [p] and [g]). Here are some examples etc etc. In fact, the prominent British phonetician John Wells notes in this blog post that "Unfortunately, U+031A doesn’t display properly". He substitutes another character that has the same shape but appears following the consonant. And finally, Pullum and Ladusaw's Phonetic Symbol Guide says that the diacritic occurs "following a stop consonant symbol" (p. 239). I think all of the above is sufficient to illustrate that the wiki article is incorrect! 142.151.171.95 (talk) 22:05, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  (The comments from 142.151.171.95 are from me; I'd forgotten about my long-disused account.) WillNL (talk) 22:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

text:  One last note: even the Unicode standard shows the diacritic following the symbol (search for 031A in this pdf). It seems that the standard has been incorrectly implemented in certain fonts, including the one that wikipedia uses, such that the diacritic appears directly above the symbol rather than above and to its right. WillNL (talk) 22:14, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Placement of the diacritic 

message: I can't make sense of the following (line 11):  "For example, hundred pounds may sound like [ˈhʌnd͡ʒɨd̥̚ ˈpʰaʊnd͡z] but X-ray and electropalatographic studies demonstrate that since inaudible and possibly-weakened contacts may still be made, the second /d/ in hundred pounds does not entirely assimilate a labial place of articulation but co-occurs with it."  If the sentence was saying that listeners perceive [ˈhʌnd͡ʒɨb̚] ([b] substituted for [d] as a result of assimilation) then the rest of the sentence would make sense to me. Is it possible that the example is wrong?   RoachPeter (talk) 09:41, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right, it was  but it was "corrected" earlier this year. Thanks for spotting this. Nardog (talk) 10:36, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hundred pounds"