Talk:Voiced bilabial fricative

message: Some pages on wikipedia list this [Bilabial approximate] sound as being the same as the Bilabial voiced Fricative, while others list it [Bilabial approximate] as a separate sound, and the IPA template has no symbol yet its location is not grayed out, implying that it is a producible sound. Since the IPA page listed it as a sound separate from the Bilabial voiced Fricative, I assumed it was a separate sound.--Blkgardner (talk) 02:25, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I added the material in brackets to my original comments to make them understandable after the move.--Blkgardner (talk) 02:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No languages contrast the bilabial approximant with the bilabial fricative.  It's the same with the dental fricative and approximant.  — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 03:39, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Should this article atleast mention that the voiced bilabial fricative can also be an approximant?  I think most of the similar pages do.  Also, is there any consensus on formatting noncontrasted phonemes?  The symbols for the Voiced uvular fricative. Voiced pharyngeal fricative, and Voiced epiglottal fricative stretch over the the fricative and approximant column.--Blkgardner (talk) 02:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a problem with mentioning it somehow.  What do you mean by "formatting noncontrasted phonemes"?  As far as  is concerned, I've thought that having the overlap for bilabial and dental fricative/approximant was better but I've been reverted.  — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 04:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: [Bilabial approximate the] Same as the Bilabial voiced Fricative?

message: Shouldn't the approximant have its own sound sample, since the fricative and approximant are different sounds? saɪm duʃɑn Talk|Contribs 09:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The best way to do that is have a sound sample for the Spanish sample.  — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 19:32, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sound sample for approximant 

message: Please create the Bilabial approximant article. A fricative is not an approximant, so removing the redirect to bilabial approximant. Srkris (talk) 20:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We can cover both here.  — Æµ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɛ̃ɾ̃ˡi] 13:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Bilabial approximant

message: I was a bit surprised that this got taken down, since I got the foreknowledge from the Korean phonology page, and the exact IPA from Wikitionary (though one can figure it out pretty easily from the page previously mentioned, as well as some other sources on-line). Since I couldn't quickly find a source explicitly stating that ㅎ becomes /β/ when before /w/, /u/, or /o/ while intervocalic, I just used the source mentioned as well as linking to the official [National Institute of Korean Language] page, which gives a voice clip for pronunciation (and that is not an /ɦ/, /ɸ/, /ç/, nor /x/). Is this sufficient, or should I hunt through the Internet a little more thoroughly to find something more substantial?
KoreanShin, Ji-young; Kiaer, Ji-eun; Cha, Jae-eun (2012). The Sounds of Korean. .http://krdic.korean.go.kr/dicSearch/search;basedic=w6KsXtgYnLzK8kZ2JQnnRvHCvb1QL1NPT4g6QDcRKHtppHhnvVqW!313269933?nationCode=&nationGubun=&ParaWordNo=&mainSearchWord=전화 National Institute of Korean Language, search for 전화    	KoreanShin, Ji-young; Kiaer, Ji-eun; Cha, Jae-eun (2012). The Sounds of Korean. .http://krdic.korean.go.kr/dicSearch/search;basedic=w6KsXtgYnLzK8kZ2JQnnRvHCvb1QL1NPT4g6QDcRKHtppHhnvVqW!313269933?nationCode=&nationGubun=&ParaWordNo=&mainSearchWord=전화 National Institute of Korean Language, search for 전화    	//		'telephone'	Allophone of /h/ before /w/, /u/, and /o/ intervocalically
Thank you!
--Blanket P.I. (talk) 12:22, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Korean Example 

message: Currently it reads "The symbol in the International Phonetic Alphabet that represents this sound is ⟨β⟩ (or more properly ⟨ꞵ⟩)" but, well, on nigh every single device and font, 'greek small letter beta' and 'latin small letter beta' are rendered exactly the same. If there's a reason, feel free to correct it, but as it stands this parenthesis is entirely pointless so I'm going to adjust the section to only use the "more proper" form and remove that section. Generic Rice (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleaning up the second sentence 

message: "The sound is not used in English dialects except for Chicano English,...." Surely the sound occurs (perhaps only historically) in Cockney (see Anthony Burgess, The Doctor is Sick, A Mouthful of Air), and in some maritime dialects?  In Dickens' Pickwick Papers, Sam Weller apparently exchanges 'w' & 'v' but Burgess explains (quite correctly IMO) that Sam is using the bilabial fricative for both consonants, and our ears hear it as an exchange. I lived in London in the 1950s and this sound was common then, especially in the East End. Similarly I have seen sailors in literature refer to the "vether wang", i.e. the weather vang. Or watch Ron Moody's (an old East-ender) lips carefully as he pronounces a /v/ in this 2013 interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4geIbwNq2A, e.g. @2:59. Sorry I don't have exact cites at the moment, but the phenomenon seems to me quite widespread. Perhaps it is only historical by 2019, but that is of interest too, particularly since the usage is documented in noted literary works. --D Anthony Patriarche (talk) 14:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Another example from the video: "very well" at 0:15. — Eru·tuon 16:30, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  English dialects