Talk:Voiced labiodental flap: Difference between revisions

i think that that symbol was used before Greenberg, but i would have to look this up. – ishwar  (speak) 22:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t jump on me for asking: is this labiodental flap also used in some pronunciations of the English curse word ‘fuck’? RedTomato (talk) 22:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtful; a strong labiodental fricative is probably what you’ve heard. —JorisvS (talk) 23:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks RedTomato (talk) 09:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I could see a pronunciation with a strong voiceless flap. I might even have done it. But I don’t know how close this would be (apart from voicing) to the phonemic flap in the languages where it occurs. — kwami (talk) 12:33, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do mean when you say you don’t know close this would be to the phonemic flap, could you elaborate? —JorisvS (talk) 14:02, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The image provided here is a <ṹ>, not <ⱱ>. Can this be fixed somehow? Omoutuazn (talk) 14:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Kwamikagami why did you tag the tap section with {{cn}} even though the existing occurrence table mentioned it? BodhiHarp 22:02, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

where’s the ref? i went to check it, and there’s nothing there — kwami (talk) 23:15, 13 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe perhaps another editor accidentally added a “harv or sfn error”. BodhiHarp 01:51, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

this is right before I removed the Danish occurrence in the plosive article since it was already mentioned here, and it seems like the ref is working there, so we could fix the ref here that leads nowhere with this. BodhiHarp 04:27, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, I found out who added this error accidentally, it was: @The Young Prussian

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Voiced_labiodental_flap&diff=prev&oldid=1246403597 BodhiHarp 04:30, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

deleted section. as far as i can tell from the source, this is a vocalic component of a diphthong, not a tap. — kwami (talk) 05:03, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s still mentioned in this article. BodhiHarp 15:00, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed now. oklopfer (💬) 15:29, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thanks — kwami (talk) 16:56, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I asked @The Young Prussian, and they said See the footnotes on page 27, so I did that, and it says ¹⁷ When Danish /v/ is realized without friction noise, the result is as short weak kind of plosive rather than a lax approximant, according to Nina Grønnum (pers. com.). Double square brackets indicate that the conventions (normalizations) for the phonetic symbol as used for Danish in this book, do not apply, i.e. the symbol just has its IPA-value. BodhiHarp 20:43, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@BodhiHarp The point is that this’ a tap, even though there’s no representation in IPA, and no doubt this isn’t a semivowel, so in the end Kwami Kagami lied, in addition the sound remains a resonant, which is even more consistent with a tap. The Young Prussian (talk) 20:49, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, there’s nothing in the body of the page that indicates that /v/ is a semivowel either. The Young Prussian (talk) 20:51, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted all the changes that removed it from articles and stuff, unless I missed one. BodhiHarp 20:53, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And what is the evidence that it should be considered distinct from the flap? There is none. It is still made up. Please revert your changes or merge it upwards into a single section, or I will revert when I get home. @BodhiHarp oklopfer (💬) 21:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page 66, not 27, which you added. oklopfer (💬) 21:09, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oklopfer No, this footnote is on page 27, I didn’t have access to page 66, and I’ve no idea what’s on it, but page 27 alone proves that it’s a tap. The Young Prussian (talk) 21:30, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page 66 mentions a semivowel – removing content because you don’t have access to the full source which is being referenced is incredibly disruptive. And page 27 states that the “short kind of plosive” was made as a personal comment – there is no literature attestation of this. I am once again removing. Additionally, taps are never distinguished from flaps, as no language makes a phonemic distinction between them. oklopfer (💬) 21:31, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oklopfer So why’s the hooked v only used for a flap and not also a tap as it is with rhotic taps, furthermore when in a language a short plosive functions as a semivowel, even more so in Danish where /v/ is clearly not a semivowel. The Young Prussian (talk) 22:55, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No one said it is only used for a flap. Is the confusion that this page only calls it a “Voiced labiodental flap”, and you want it to be called a “Voiced labiodental tap or flap”? oklopfer (💬) 23:04, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prussian, if you’re gonna call me a liar for citing the source, then we can’t take you seriously as an editor. if either of you have evidence for this, then quote the relevant passage here, with citation. otherwise we’ll revert you under the assumption that you’re incompetent, and if you continue to edit-war, request to have you blocked. — kwami (talk) 00:05, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]