Talk:Inuit phonology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Native Americans, Indigenous peoples in Canada, and related indigenous peoples of North America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Indigenous peoples of North AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North AmericaIndigenous peoples of North America articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Languages

	Language portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LanguagesWikipedia:WikiProject LanguagesTemplate:WikiProject Languageslanguage articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Linguistics: Phonetics

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

[edit]

Is capital K used in Nunatsiavummiutut the same or related to Kra (letter) used in the Kalaallisut language? Andreas 02:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions:

Is /ɬ/ really spelled ɫ (L with ~ through it) (which is the IPA symbol for "velarized or pharyngeal" [l])? Are you sure they don't use the originally Polish letter Łł (L with / through it) which e. g. Navajo uses for its own /ɬ/?

Where /q/ becomes a fricative, does it really become [ɣ], or does it stay uvular and becomes [ʁ]?

David Marjanović | david.marjanovic_at_gmx.at | 1:43 CEST | 2006/5/7

Qawiaraq or Qawariaq?[edit]

Someone needs to find out if the dialect is called Qawiaraq, or Qawariaq, and standardize the spelling throughout the article. Qawiaraq language exists on Wikipedia, but I don't know if that itself is misspelled. 24.159.255.29 19:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dorais(1990) spells it as Qawiaraq... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.224.77.180 (talk) 19:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Needs cleaning up[edit]

Here are some things I found to be worded inaccurately or confusingly. I've reworded a few things, but I'm not sure how to rewrite the rest, since I haven't done the research to know exactly what's being said.

Retroflexes have disappeared in all the Canadian and Greenlandic dialects, except for the phoneme /ɟ/ in Natsilingmiutut, which derives from a former retroflex.

I'm not sure that sentence needs to be kept in the introduction; I think it makes sense to move it to the section "Retroflex consonants in western dialects" (what's there already tells part of the story, but needs to be cleaned up... see below). Also, it seems a little strange to say that the sound "disappeared" except for in Natsilingmiutut, where it became palatal. First, the sound in Natsilingmiutut shouldn't count as a retroflex since, notwithstanding its origin, it is not retroflex. Also, when you say it "disappeared," do you mean the sound actually become a phonological zero in other dialects? Or did it just undergo a change to another sound, as it did in Natsilingmiutut? (The gist of these questions is: what makes the Natsilingmiutut development any different from the development in other dialects?)

Section "Retroflex consonants in western dialects":

Natsilingmiutut retains as a phoneme the plosive, and often retroflex, palatal consonant /ɟ/.

This doesn't make sense. It can't be both palatal and retroflex, can it? Do you mean that sometimes it is palatal and other times retroflex?

In Inupiatun, the /ɟ/ of Natsilingmiutut and the /j/ in some central Inuktitut words has become [ʐ] (written r).

Do you really mean that /ɟ/ has become [ʐ], or merely that they correspond (and both derive from a common ancestral sound)? (The first option would only make sense if Inupiatun were descended from Natsilingmiutut, which doesn't seem to be true).

In addition to the voiced retroflex fricative /ʐ/ (written "r"), Inupiatun also has a voiceless retroflex fricative /ʂ/ written as "sr". This additional manner of articulation is largely distinctive to Inupiatun – it is absent from the more easterly dialects, except for the /ɟ/ of Natsilingmiutut.

A voiceless retroflex fricative has the same manner of articulation as a voiced retroflex fricative; it is not an "additional manner of articulation." Further, I don't understand how the /ɟ/ of Natsilingmiutut relates here at all; it isn't even voiceless, let alone retroflex. 24.159.255.29 19:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nasal endings[edit]

The section on nasalised endings makes it sound as if some western dialects turn a final -t into an -n.

Is it not the other way around? That is, the -n is the ancestral form and the eastern dialects have turned this into -t?

I seem to recall reading something along the lines that in older (expected to be conservative) speakers of eastern dialects, final -t marking "you (sg.)" object and final -t marking the plural behave differently, one turning into -n and the other not (though I don't remember which way around). This would indicate that the -t --> -n is not a general prosodic thing guided merely by sound, but would be consistent with retaining an original -n in some cases -- if the "you (sg.)" object had -n originally and the plural had -t (or the other way around, whichever it was). -- pne (talk) 11:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inuit phonology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051027152937/http://www.oqaasileriffik.gl/cgi-bin/katersat.cgi?lang=eng to http://www.oqaasileriffik.gl/cgi-bin/katersat.cgi?lang=eng

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:38, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]