This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Milescarey.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 14:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I have really problems understanding this:
However, by the 8th century, the letter alif no longer represented a glottal stop only, but also a long /aː/. As a result, a diacritic symbol, hamza (ء),[citation needed] was introduced to represent this sound with alif, and a hamza can be used, separately, now without the letter alif, to indicate the sound.
It should definitely be more specific about "which sound". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.117.40 ( talk) 23:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
If anyone could add IPA to this, it would be helpful. Thanks!
Uhh, I somehow doubt Arabic phonology is quite as simple as a 1:1 correspondance with the writing system. This article seems too simplistic to be really useful.
One-dimensional Tangent 03:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've been studying Arabic for a few months now, and I've definitely noticed a difference in the vowels /i/ and /u/ around emphatics as well. The seem to have a schwa-glide towards the emphatic. I don't have any sources, but if anyone else does that would be a good addition. Makerowner 04:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
One-Dimentional Tangent, you are right about the absence of 1:1 correspondance when taking into account dialects and regional pronunciations. However, the nature of Fus7a is to keep the language standard, so there is relatively little variance (in theory).
Also, could someone with the technical know-how change the placement of (ظ) on the chart? It should be a pharyngealized voiced INTERDENTAL fricative, not a DENTAL. It does swing to a DENTAL in Egyptian and other regional pronunciations, but it is clearly the former in proper Fus7a. Thanks!
The short vowel /a/ does not differ in quality from the long vowel /ā/. If we are talking about either Modern Standard Arabic or Fusha, it is incorrect to state that the short vowel should be rendered as "[ɛ̈] (open e as in English bed, but centralised)". Doubtless this is true of some dialect somewhere. Maybe the author is trying to approximate the Tunisian /a/, which falls precisely on the dividing line between American English /a/ as in "bad" and /e/ as in "bed". Recommendation: change to "[æ]" as in "bad", except after /r/, where it is pronounced [ɑ], as the "o" in American English "hot". -- Cbdorsett 05:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I reckon the article should mention the distinction between those consonants which get doubled after al-, when the leem becomes silent, (called "sun letters" because of the example "ash-shams") and the other consonants (called "moon letters" after the example "al-qamar").
Isn't Arabic famous for having uvular fricatives ([χ ʁ]) rather than velar ones ([x ɣ]? Is that a difference between dialects or something? David Marjanović 20:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The standard pronunciation of MSA features velar fricatives, but plenty of dialects have uvular realizations. The Dropper 21:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Shouldnt [ɛ̈] be transcribed [ɜ] ?
Shouldn't [sˁ] be transcribed [sˤ] ? [4]
-- Sonjaaa 03:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Why was the chart changed? [g] is simply not a phoneme of standard Arabic. It is the realization of /dʒ/ in Egypt, but the standard pronounciation is still /dʒ/. The Dropper 07:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
But that's not the standard pronounciation, which is what I thought the chart was intended to describe. MSA has a standard pronounciation which is taught to foreign learners and very important in reciting the Qur'an.
Also, notes are necessary to describe that the lateral approximant is only velarized in certain situations pertaining to the word for God, الله. It's definitely not a phoneme and I'm not sure if it should be included on the chart even in brackets. The Dropper 03:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I see changes have been made. Looks good to me.:)
So the only question, I think, is with the back fricatives. I think it'd be sufficient to denote them as velar, with a note that they may be uvular depending on dialect or whatever. What do you think? The Dropper 20:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The standard pronunciation of Arabic is based on what's used for reciting the Qur'an. It's taught to foreign learners, as well.
This article needs some improvements. Unfortunately, some areas of Arabic phonology are a little hazy, because any language with so many speakers covering such a wide area will inevitably have some variation. For example, the "emphatic" consonants of the language are most often described as pharyngealized but I've heard they are velarized as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.152.45 ( talk • contribs)
Yeah, it's not specified. I think it varies according to dialect and maybe other factors. However, I think that velar is the dominant pronunciation ... maybe post-velar. Hard to say. The Dropper 17:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
The article on the voiced epiglottal fricative cites the great and mighty Ladefoged as finding that the pharyngeal consonants are epiglottal, rather than pharyngeal, in some dialects. Should that be mentioned?
Also, the chart says [ðˤ], while the frequency table says [zˤ]. That's another dialect difference, or rather a regional difference in the standard, right? If so, this should be explained, too. David Marjanović ( talk) 01:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
The portion about /dʒ/ is very confusing. Many Arabs insist letter ج should be pronounced /ʒ/, this being standard, not colloquial pronunciation. I don't understand the section " In classical Arabic, this was either [ɟ] or [gʲ]." Where is this from - what's the source? Is it correct? What are these sounds? Isn't the classical pronunciation /dʒ/ of the letter? It seems it has shifted to /ʒ/ (Eastern Arab countries) and /g/ (Egypt and Yemen(?)) but otherwise, isn't the other pronunciation are part of spoken dialects? MSA in Western Arab countries still use /dʒ/, if I am not mistaken. Also, please confirm that [j] is used in formal pronunciation of the letter in some countries. (We are discussing standard, not dialectal phonology?). In Egypt, pronouncing ج as [g] is considered standard. -- Atitarev ( talk) 23:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I always thought /ʃ/ in Arabic developed from Proto-Semitic /ɬ/. At least, that's what happened in Hebrew. 24.235.158.206 ( talk) 20:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
The article states that /lˤ/ occurs only in a handful of loanwords and /ʔalˤˈlˤaːh/, the name of God, i.e. Allah, except when following long or short /i/ when it is not emphatic: bismi l-lāh [bismilˈlaːh] ('in the name of God').
However, work by a number of phoneticians has demonstrated, fairly conclusively, that the dark /lˤ/ occurs far more often than this. Charles A. Ferguson, for example, has shown that modern speakers of MSA tend to import their phonemic Dark L from dialects, such as Iraqi, where dark L is far more widespread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Szfski ( talk • contribs) 03:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Should the sounds missing in the classical Arabic but commonly used for foreign names be included, e.g. consonants: v, p, g, ʒ, tʃ and vowels: o, e, o:, e:? Atitarev ( talk) 23:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
EDIT:
-- Atitarev ( talk) 23:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it's the American in me that doubts that enough Arabic speakers speak English that foreign sounds aren't an issue for most speakers.
IMO this article, and the discussion among you two, are currently rather messed-up and are going to remain that way until you clarify some issues. Koranic Arabic, CA, MSA and dialects are all different and need to be clearly distinguished when talking about Arabic phonology. Consider the following different cases, and note that NONE OF THEM are a single system with a single "phonology":
Benwing ( talk) 05:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Atitarev ( talk) 06:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Benwing (
talk) 07:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
« Thelwall (1990) argues[12] that Arabic descriptions of a voiced pharyngeal fricative are incorrect and that Arabic varieties instead possesses a pharyngealized glottal stop ([ʔˤ]. Epiglottal realizations for /ħ/ and /ʕ/ have also been reported.[13]»
In English for example the American mid-land accent is considered to the neutral English accent for all of North America. Does modern standard Arabic have an area that represents a neutral pronunciation? Egypt has media influence, Saudi Arabia has the heirtage, and Jordan a centering location, to any of them reflect a neutral pronunciation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.60.200 ( talk) 00:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Would you please mention that this is (probably) Gulf-Arab phonology?
- In Egypt, we pronounce those differntly; /kokæˈkoːlæ/, /læˈmuːm/, /dokˈtoːɾ/, /ˈʒoːn ~ ˈʒon/, /belˈʒiːkæ/, /sekɾeˈteːɾ/. (There is no /d͡ʒ/) Mahmudmasri ( talk) 16:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I will edit some, but as I mentioned before, it's the dialectal Egyptian pronunciation (although, it is considered prestigious it can't be called standard, if you know what I mean? /d͡ʒ/ and /ʒ/ variations are already described. As for vowels /a/, /æ/, the article groups them together as allophones, strictly speaking it's not correct but the article needs sources to change that. -- Anatoli ( talk) 21:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
The article states that velar/uvular fricatives cause [a] to be retracted to [ɑ]. I must admit to skepticism on this matter. While this was probably true in classical Arabic (and is still the proscribed/preferred practice for Qur'anic recitation) one rarely hears Arabs do this when speaking MSA naturally unless their native dialect does it (and even then not always.) It is quite common, for example, to hear the word خائف (afraid) pronounced as [xaːʔif] or even [xæːʔif] when speaking MSA. This is even true for many southern Palestinians whose dialect has [xɑːjef]. Moreover, I have yet to find a single MSA user who pronounces a word like غداً (tomorrow) as [ɣɑdɑn]. It's a good bet that the source given for this particular statement (which, admittedly, I have not read) describes a theoretical prescription, rather than a practical description. Other wiki articles on Arabic (such as ʾIʿrab) give both prescriptive rules and a descriptive summary of what occurs in practice. It would seem logical that this article do likewise. My instinct is to say that the statement in question should be removed, or at least qualified.
In addition, the rules governing whether or not a given vowel such as [a] is to be retracted are (even allowing for the above complexity) incredibly intricate. Watson (1999) and Davis (1995) have demonstrated that vowel retraction is contingent on several factors, including the place and manner of articulation of other consonants in the stem and how those consonants are distributed. If I use such sources to add a section that gives a fuller description on the complexities of Arabic vowel-retraction, does that sound like a good idea? Szfski ( talk) 10:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
(unindent) Let's put off the rename for now, though you're right that that may be a better title if we are to confine the scope at the same time that we talk about Colloquial Arabic. I like the Colloquial Arabic article idea and look forward to seeing it; my only suggestion is that, since it will be an article discussing multiple dialects that it should be titled Phonologies of Colloquial Arabic. Eventually, it may even become a hub for phonology articles of various colloquial dialects. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 22:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
That is how Arabic letters are mostly pronounced by Egyptian Arabic speakers & are pronounced as that while reading in MSA. Notice also the Arabic diphthongs (/aj, aw/) are often pronounced [eː, oː] so as, Egyptian vowels are pronounced instead of the supposedly Arabic vowels even in MSA:
ا [(ʔ)æ, (ʔ)ɑ, ʔe-] name: [ˈælef] —
ب [b] name: [be] —
ت [t] name: [te] —
ث [s] or [θ] name: [se] —
ج [ɡ] only! no [ʒ] or [dʒ] name: [ɡiːm] —
ح [ħ] name: [ħɑ] —
خ [x] name: [xɑ] —
د [d] name: [dæːl] —
ذ [z] or [ð] name: [zæːl] —
ر [r~ɾ] name: [re] —
ز [z] name: [zeːn] not [zæːj] —
س [s] name: [siːn] —
ش [ʃ] name: [ʃiːn] —
ص [s] & [sˤ] name: [sˤɑːd] or [sɑːd] —
ض [d] or [dˤ] name: [dɑːd] or [dˤɑːd] —
ط [tˤ] & [t] name: [tˤɑ] —
ظ [zˤ] & [z] not [ðˤ] name: [zˤɑ] —
ع [ʕ] name: [ʕeːn] (notice that
Gulf Arabic /ʕ/ sounds more like [ʕˤ] —
غ [ɣ] not [ʁ] name: [ɣeːn] —
ف [f] name: [fe] —
ق [k~q] name: [kɑːf~qɑːf] —
ك [k] name: [kæːf] —
ل [l] name: [læːm] —
م [m] name: [miːm] —
ن [n] name: [nuːn] —
ه [h, -æ, -ɑ] name: [he] —
و [w, o(ː), uː] name: [wɑːw] —
ي/ى [j, e(ː), iː, -i, -æ, -ɑ] name: [je, ˈælef læjˈjenæ].
Modern Standard Arabic compared to Classical Arabic resembles Ecclesiastical Latin compared to Classical Latin. -- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 08:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
The famous drink Vimto does! And for Arabic marketing did and I guess does (I've never actually seen it, only really old-school ads). According to this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ve_(Arabic)) it's used in Algerian and Tunisian... can't comment on that, and in the Jawi script for Bahasa Malaysia. I have seen it infrequently written in Arabic (I believe Classical because I think the examples I'm remembering are from al-Kitaab fii t3llum etc. the classic Tonsi book (love that guy)) for proper-noun loanwords (not like televison), but I can't cite that beyond the Ve_(Arabic) page. Msheflin ( talk) 01:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Right now the cell that represents the voiced velar plosive pronunciation isn't included in the group of cells reflecting the variable pronunciation of ǧīm. How should we address this? We could maybe make the border between cells invisible, but I don't know how to do that. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 22:22, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
arabic phonetics are the three voices A o and E. they are not written, but deducted from reading. in English Basket is written in Arabic BSKT. BSKT could be read basket or beskuit, Baskat basakat, basakit, etc etc etc. to know the pronunciation (aka vowels of each letter ie the hidden vowel after the letter, you definitely need to know arabic grammar. there is no substitution for that. Even if the vowels were given to you you still need arabic grammer to understand what it means. a o e are very much exchangeable in a sec. don't rely on seeing a vowel and deducing that it will be repeated.
the basic grammar of ARABIC IS THAT ALL words are derived from three letter verb (root word). If their is no root word for a word then it is not arabic inorigin. this verb (root word) is in the past tense example: FSL a root word (means seperated ie past tense) the phonetics of the root word is always aaa Fsl reads Fasala
now lets come to a derivative word from FSL which is FSL but not pronounced Fasala but pronounced Fasl meaning the action of separating.
Now
the subject ie the one who do FSL (the separator)
Fasel. FASL (pronounced as Fasel) is the standard subject derivative of the root word but is not the only one. fsal (pronounced Fassal) is another one (denote extra doer) Fsil (pronounced fasseel) is another one
it is the word place in the sentense that tells you it is a verb or a NOWN ETC HENCE ITS PRONUNCIATION THAT COMES INSTANTLY WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE.
If vowel letters are added to a sentense it will become impossible to read to the arabs. since arabic is the most vowelistic language (you cant put that in writing) there will be too many vowel letters. arabs hate consonants without being voweled. the too many vowels in arabic is a characteristic of arabic not shared by another language.
seeing a word like BSKT you have to expect 4 hidden vowels immediately. arabs like to say rather Basaketa than basket.
the letters V G Q P are not existant in arabic or semitic languaqges, even arabs can pronounce them they are rather piggy sounds.
to say these letters in ancient times means you are foreigner or a perv, very shameful.
chinese referred to the Russians in ancient times as Yezuhi. of course Russian word come from Rose (the red color) meaning the red people Rothschild means the red shield, the red color the color of the blood (hence the red flag was a testimonia that since blood are in humans and animals then humans are animals and should do away with religion, because blood is the only soul that comes out of dead hence the red flag of the communists) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zahida2013 ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I notice that the section on syllable structure has no sources. I also notice that, if we are talking about MSA or CA, it is incorrect. In FusHa, semivowels are treated identically to consonants, and cannot come between either an initial consonant and the vowel or the vowel and a final consonant. The only exception is in pausal forms, where two consonants may come at the very end of a final syllable, but even then semivowels are treated no differently from other consonants.
2620:105:B00B:6801:FC96:A281:67EA:864A ( talk) 21:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Please add the orthographic version of the sample to the article. I can't do it, as I don't know the Arabic alphabet. Peter238 ( talk) 13:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me like we should be using the Standard Arabic phonemes rather than trying to accommodate every single dialect. Our chart should be more similar to the International Phonetic Association's. -- Monochrome_ Monitor 18:28, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Arabic phonology/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
As far as it goes, this article seems to have a very good quality and is well-referenced. There may be minor issues, but these are not relevant before it is nominated for GA. However, any information on accent, suprasegmental characteristcs such as sentence intonation, are lacking. Thus, this article seems to be exactly C class. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC) |
Last edited at 21:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 08:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I realized that this article doesn't mention the fact that the phonemes /t/ and /k/ are actually aspirated ([tʰ] and [kʰ] respectively) which is an important property for these phonemes. Some old linguists such as Ibn AlJazari described these sounds as "whispered" which they explained to mean "the release of the stop is accompanied with a strong burst of breath that you can feel if you put your palm in front of your mouth."
I was wondering if we should change the IPA chart to /tʰ/ and /kʰ/ instead of /t/ and /k/, or maybe at least make a point about it in the article. ICanHelpYou ( talk) 18:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
E NASSER142010 ( talk) 23:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2019 and 11 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Milescarey.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT ( talk) 14:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I have really problems understanding this:
However, by the 8th century, the letter alif no longer represented a glottal stop only, but also a long /aː/. As a result, a diacritic symbol, hamza (ء),[citation needed] was introduced to represent this sound with alif, and a hamza can be used, separately, now without the letter alif, to indicate the sound.
It should definitely be more specific about "which sound". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.220.117.40 ( talk) 23:04, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
If anyone could add IPA to this, it would be helpful. Thanks!
Uhh, I somehow doubt Arabic phonology is quite as simple as a 1:1 correspondance with the writing system. This article seems too simplistic to be really useful.
One-dimensional Tangent 03:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I've been studying Arabic for a few months now, and I've definitely noticed a difference in the vowels /i/ and /u/ around emphatics as well. The seem to have a schwa-glide towards the emphatic. I don't have any sources, but if anyone else does that would be a good addition. Makerowner 04:04, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
One-Dimentional Tangent, you are right about the absence of 1:1 correspondance when taking into account dialects and regional pronunciations. However, the nature of Fus7a is to keep the language standard, so there is relatively little variance (in theory).
Also, could someone with the technical know-how change the placement of (ظ) on the chart? It should be a pharyngealized voiced INTERDENTAL fricative, not a DENTAL. It does swing to a DENTAL in Egyptian and other regional pronunciations, but it is clearly the former in proper Fus7a. Thanks!
The short vowel /a/ does not differ in quality from the long vowel /ā/. If we are talking about either Modern Standard Arabic or Fusha, it is incorrect to state that the short vowel should be rendered as "[ɛ̈] (open e as in English bed, but centralised)". Doubtless this is true of some dialect somewhere. Maybe the author is trying to approximate the Tunisian /a/, which falls precisely on the dividing line between American English /a/ as in "bad" and /e/ as in "bed". Recommendation: change to "[æ]" as in "bad", except after /r/, where it is pronounced [ɑ], as the "o" in American English "hot". -- Cbdorsett 05:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
I reckon the article should mention the distinction between those consonants which get doubled after al-, when the leem becomes silent, (called "sun letters" because of the example "ash-shams") and the other consonants (called "moon letters" after the example "al-qamar").
Isn't Arabic famous for having uvular fricatives ([χ ʁ]) rather than velar ones ([x ɣ]? Is that a difference between dialects or something? David Marjanović 20:55, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The standard pronunciation of MSA features velar fricatives, but plenty of dialects have uvular realizations. The Dropper 21:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Shouldnt [ɛ̈] be transcribed [ɜ] ?
Shouldn't [sˁ] be transcribed [sˤ] ? [4]
-- Sonjaaa 03:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Why was the chart changed? [g] is simply not a phoneme of standard Arabic. It is the realization of /dʒ/ in Egypt, but the standard pronounciation is still /dʒ/. The Dropper 07:21, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
But that's not the standard pronounciation, which is what I thought the chart was intended to describe. MSA has a standard pronounciation which is taught to foreign learners and very important in reciting the Qur'an.
Also, notes are necessary to describe that the lateral approximant is only velarized in certain situations pertaining to the word for God, الله. It's definitely not a phoneme and I'm not sure if it should be included on the chart even in brackets. The Dropper 03:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I see changes have been made. Looks good to me.:)
So the only question, I think, is with the back fricatives. I think it'd be sufficient to denote them as velar, with a note that they may be uvular depending on dialect or whatever. What do you think? The Dropper 20:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
The standard pronunciation of Arabic is based on what's used for reciting the Qur'an. It's taught to foreign learners, as well.
This article needs some improvements. Unfortunately, some areas of Arabic phonology are a little hazy, because any language with so many speakers covering such a wide area will inevitably have some variation. For example, the "emphatic" consonants of the language are most often described as pharyngealized but I've heard they are velarized as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.235.152.45 ( talk • contribs)
Yeah, it's not specified. I think it varies according to dialect and maybe other factors. However, I think that velar is the dominant pronunciation ... maybe post-velar. Hard to say. The Dropper 17:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
The article on the voiced epiglottal fricative cites the great and mighty Ladefoged as finding that the pharyngeal consonants are epiglottal, rather than pharyngeal, in some dialects. Should that be mentioned?
Also, the chart says [ðˤ], while the frequency table says [zˤ]. That's another dialect difference, or rather a regional difference in the standard, right? If so, this should be explained, too. David Marjanović ( talk) 01:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
The portion about /dʒ/ is very confusing. Many Arabs insist letter ج should be pronounced /ʒ/, this being standard, not colloquial pronunciation. I don't understand the section " In classical Arabic, this was either [ɟ] or [gʲ]." Where is this from - what's the source? Is it correct? What are these sounds? Isn't the classical pronunciation /dʒ/ of the letter? It seems it has shifted to /ʒ/ (Eastern Arab countries) and /g/ (Egypt and Yemen(?)) but otherwise, isn't the other pronunciation are part of spoken dialects? MSA in Western Arab countries still use /dʒ/, if I am not mistaken. Also, please confirm that [j] is used in formal pronunciation of the letter in some countries. (We are discussing standard, not dialectal phonology?). In Egypt, pronouncing ج as [g] is considered standard. -- Atitarev ( talk) 23:29, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I always thought /ʃ/ in Arabic developed from Proto-Semitic /ɬ/. At least, that's what happened in Hebrew. 24.235.158.206 ( talk) 20:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
The article states that /lˤ/ occurs only in a handful of loanwords and /ʔalˤˈlˤaːh/, the name of God, i.e. Allah, except when following long or short /i/ when it is not emphatic: bismi l-lāh [bismilˈlaːh] ('in the name of God').
However, work by a number of phoneticians has demonstrated, fairly conclusively, that the dark /lˤ/ occurs far more often than this. Charles A. Ferguson, for example, has shown that modern speakers of MSA tend to import their phonemic Dark L from dialects, such as Iraqi, where dark L is far more widespread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Szfski ( talk • contribs) 03:56, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
Should the sounds missing in the classical Arabic but commonly used for foreign names be included, e.g. consonants: v, p, g, ʒ, tʃ and vowels: o, e, o:, e:? Atitarev ( talk) 23:39, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
EDIT:
-- Atitarev ( talk) 23:12, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
Maybe it's the American in me that doubts that enough Arabic speakers speak English that foreign sounds aren't an issue for most speakers.
IMO this article, and the discussion among you two, are currently rather messed-up and are going to remain that way until you clarify some issues. Koranic Arabic, CA, MSA and dialects are all different and need to be clearly distinguished when talking about Arabic phonology. Consider the following different cases, and note that NONE OF THEM are a single system with a single "phonology":
Benwing ( talk) 05:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Atitarev ( talk) 06:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
Benwing (
talk) 07:45, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
« Thelwall (1990) argues[12] that Arabic descriptions of a voiced pharyngeal fricative are incorrect and that Arabic varieties instead possesses a pharyngealized glottal stop ([ʔˤ]. Epiglottal realizations for /ħ/ and /ʕ/ have also been reported.[13]»
In English for example the American mid-land accent is considered to the neutral English accent for all of North America. Does modern standard Arabic have an area that represents a neutral pronunciation? Egypt has media influence, Saudi Arabia has the heirtage, and Jordan a centering location, to any of them reflect a neutral pronunciation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.57.60.200 ( talk) 00:56, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Would you please mention that this is (probably) Gulf-Arab phonology?
- In Egypt, we pronounce those differntly; /kokæˈkoːlæ/, /læˈmuːm/, /dokˈtoːɾ/, /ˈʒoːn ~ ˈʒon/, /belˈʒiːkæ/, /sekɾeˈteːɾ/. (There is no /d͡ʒ/) Mahmudmasri ( talk) 16:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
I will edit some, but as I mentioned before, it's the dialectal Egyptian pronunciation (although, it is considered prestigious it can't be called standard, if you know what I mean? /d͡ʒ/ and /ʒ/ variations are already described. As for vowels /a/, /æ/, the article groups them together as allophones, strictly speaking it's not correct but the article needs sources to change that. -- Anatoli ( talk) 21:57, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
The article states that velar/uvular fricatives cause [a] to be retracted to [ɑ]. I must admit to skepticism on this matter. While this was probably true in classical Arabic (and is still the proscribed/preferred practice for Qur'anic recitation) one rarely hears Arabs do this when speaking MSA naturally unless their native dialect does it (and even then not always.) It is quite common, for example, to hear the word خائف (afraid) pronounced as [xaːʔif] or even [xæːʔif] when speaking MSA. This is even true for many southern Palestinians whose dialect has [xɑːjef]. Moreover, I have yet to find a single MSA user who pronounces a word like غداً (tomorrow) as [ɣɑdɑn]. It's a good bet that the source given for this particular statement (which, admittedly, I have not read) describes a theoretical prescription, rather than a practical description. Other wiki articles on Arabic (such as ʾIʿrab) give both prescriptive rules and a descriptive summary of what occurs in practice. It would seem logical that this article do likewise. My instinct is to say that the statement in question should be removed, or at least qualified.
In addition, the rules governing whether or not a given vowel such as [a] is to be retracted are (even allowing for the above complexity) incredibly intricate. Watson (1999) and Davis (1995) have demonstrated that vowel retraction is contingent on several factors, including the place and manner of articulation of other consonants in the stem and how those consonants are distributed. If I use such sources to add a section that gives a fuller description on the complexities of Arabic vowel-retraction, does that sound like a good idea? Szfski ( talk) 10:41, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
(unindent) Let's put off the rename for now, though you're right that that may be a better title if we are to confine the scope at the same time that we talk about Colloquial Arabic. I like the Colloquial Arabic article idea and look forward to seeing it; my only suggestion is that, since it will be an article discussing multiple dialects that it should be titled Phonologies of Colloquial Arabic. Eventually, it may even become a hub for phonology articles of various colloquial dialects. — Ƶ§œš¹ [aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi] 22:13, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
That is how Arabic letters are mostly pronounced by Egyptian Arabic speakers & are pronounced as that while reading in MSA. Notice also the Arabic diphthongs (/aj, aw/) are often pronounced [eː, oː] so as, Egyptian vowels are pronounced instead of the supposedly Arabic vowels even in MSA:
ا [(ʔ)æ, (ʔ)ɑ, ʔe-] name: [ˈælef] —
ب [b] name: [be] —
ت [t] name: [te] —
ث [s] or [θ] name: [se] —
ج [ɡ] only! no [ʒ] or [dʒ] name: [ɡiːm] —
ح [ħ] name: [ħɑ] —
خ [x] name: [xɑ] —
د [d] name: [dæːl] —
ذ [z] or [ð] name: [zæːl] —
ر [r~ɾ] name: [re] —
ز [z] name: [zeːn] not [zæːj] —
س [s] name: [siːn] —
ش [ʃ] name: [ʃiːn] —
ص [s] & [sˤ] name: [sˤɑːd] or [sɑːd] —
ض [d] or [dˤ] name: [dɑːd] or [dˤɑːd] —
ط [tˤ] & [t] name: [tˤɑ] —
ظ [zˤ] & [z] not [ðˤ] name: [zˤɑ] —
ع [ʕ] name: [ʕeːn] (notice that
Gulf Arabic /ʕ/ sounds more like [ʕˤ] —
غ [ɣ] not [ʁ] name: [ɣeːn] —
ف [f] name: [fe] —
ق [k~q] name: [kɑːf~qɑːf] —
ك [k] name: [kæːf] —
ل [l] name: [læːm] —
م [m] name: [miːm] —
ن [n] name: [nuːn] —
ه [h, -æ, -ɑ] name: [he] —
و [w, o(ː), uː] name: [wɑːw] —
ي/ى [j, e(ː), iː, -i, -æ, -ɑ] name: [je, ˈælef læjˈjenæ].
Modern Standard Arabic compared to Classical Arabic resembles Ecclesiastical Latin compared to Classical Latin. -- Mahmudmasri ( talk) 08:43, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
The famous drink Vimto does! And for Arabic marketing did and I guess does (I've never actually seen it, only really old-school ads). According to this ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ve_(Arabic)) it's used in Algerian and Tunisian... can't comment on that, and in the Jawi script for Bahasa Malaysia. I have seen it infrequently written in Arabic (I believe Classical because I think the examples I'm remembering are from al-Kitaab fii t3llum etc. the classic Tonsi book (love that guy)) for proper-noun loanwords (not like televison), but I can't cite that beyond the Ve_(Arabic) page. Msheflin ( talk) 01:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Right now the cell that represents the voiced velar plosive pronunciation isn't included in the group of cells reflecting the variable pronunciation of ǧīm. How should we address this? We could maybe make the border between cells invisible, but I don't know how to do that. — Ƶ§œš¹ [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ] 22:22, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
arabic phonetics are the three voices A o and E. they are not written, but deducted from reading. in English Basket is written in Arabic BSKT. BSKT could be read basket or beskuit, Baskat basakat, basakit, etc etc etc. to know the pronunciation (aka vowels of each letter ie the hidden vowel after the letter, you definitely need to know arabic grammar. there is no substitution for that. Even if the vowels were given to you you still need arabic grammer to understand what it means. a o e are very much exchangeable in a sec. don't rely on seeing a vowel and deducing that it will be repeated.
the basic grammar of ARABIC IS THAT ALL words are derived from three letter verb (root word). If their is no root word for a word then it is not arabic inorigin. this verb (root word) is in the past tense example: FSL a root word (means seperated ie past tense) the phonetics of the root word is always aaa Fsl reads Fasala
now lets come to a derivative word from FSL which is FSL but not pronounced Fasala but pronounced Fasl meaning the action of separating.
Now
the subject ie the one who do FSL (the separator)
Fasel. FASL (pronounced as Fasel) is the standard subject derivative of the root word but is not the only one. fsal (pronounced Fassal) is another one (denote extra doer) Fsil (pronounced fasseel) is another one
it is the word place in the sentense that tells you it is a verb or a NOWN ETC HENCE ITS PRONUNCIATION THAT COMES INSTANTLY WITH THAT KNOWLEDGE.
If vowel letters are added to a sentense it will become impossible to read to the arabs. since arabic is the most vowelistic language (you cant put that in writing) there will be too many vowel letters. arabs hate consonants without being voweled. the too many vowels in arabic is a characteristic of arabic not shared by another language.
seeing a word like BSKT you have to expect 4 hidden vowels immediately. arabs like to say rather Basaketa than basket.
the letters V G Q P are not existant in arabic or semitic languaqges, even arabs can pronounce them they are rather piggy sounds.
to say these letters in ancient times means you are foreigner or a perv, very shameful.
chinese referred to the Russians in ancient times as Yezuhi. of course Russian word come from Rose (the red color) meaning the red people Rothschild means the red shield, the red color the color of the blood (hence the red flag was a testimonia that since blood are in humans and animals then humans are animals and should do away with religion, because blood is the only soul that comes out of dead hence the red flag of the communists) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zahida2013 ( talk • contribs) 19:07, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
I notice that the section on syllable structure has no sources. I also notice that, if we are talking about MSA or CA, it is incorrect. In FusHa, semivowels are treated identically to consonants, and cannot come between either an initial consonant and the vowel or the vowel and a final consonant. The only exception is in pausal forms, where two consonants may come at the very end of a final syllable, but even then semivowels are treated no differently from other consonants.
2620:105:B00B:6801:FC96:A281:67EA:864A ( talk) 21:45, 28 April 2014 (UTC)
Please add the orthographic version of the sample to the article. I can't do it, as I don't know the Arabic alphabet. Peter238 ( talk) 13:29, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me like we should be using the Standard Arabic phonemes rather than trying to accommodate every single dialect. Our chart should be more similar to the International Phonetic Association's. -- Monochrome_ Monitor 18:28, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Arabic phonology/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
As far as it goes, this article seems to have a very good quality and is well-referenced. There may be minor issues, but these are not relevant before it is nominated for GA. However, any information on accent, suprasegmental characteristcs such as sentence intonation, are lacking. Thus, this article seems to be exactly C class. G Purevdorj ( talk) 21:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC) |
Last edited at 21:18, 19 July 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 08:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I realized that this article doesn't mention the fact that the phonemes /t/ and /k/ are actually aspirated ([tʰ] and [kʰ] respectively) which is an important property for these phonemes. Some old linguists such as Ibn AlJazari described these sounds as "whispered" which they explained to mean "the release of the stop is accompanied with a strong burst of breath that you can feel if you put your palm in front of your mouth."
I was wondering if we should change the IPA chart to /tʰ/ and /kʰ/ instead of /t/ and /k/, or maybe at least make a point about it in the article. ICanHelpYou ( talk) 18:22, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
E NASSER142010 ( talk) 23:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)