Talk:Dental approximant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Discussion moved from Template:Consonants

I am trying to put a link to dental approximants but having trouble with the coding. Can anyone help? Nlsanand 02:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it even appropriate to have that page? The dental approximant is noncontrastive with the dental fricative. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 04:23, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The only reason I knew the difference was because of the explanation of the dental approximant being present in Spanish. So I am assuming it is contrastive, but again I am not a linguist. Nlsanand 23:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

It's an allophone in Spanish, so it's not contrastive. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 23:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

From what I understand in Spanish it's an allophone of the voiced dental plosive. However, most linguists seem to distinguish it from voiced dental fricative, ie it still contrasts with the fricative even if it is not an independant phoneme in any language. Nlsanand 23:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and linguists also distinguish an apical /s/ from a laminal one, it doesn't mean it each needs a whole page to itself. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 23:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't that mean though they are contrastive, and therefore should be included, as opposed to not? Nlsanand 00:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

No. Contrastiveness is in regards to language inventories, not in regards to linguistic discussions. We should probably move this discussion to Talk:Voiced dental fricative Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 00:37, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Look, there is clearly a difference as that is the reason why people insist on pointing out the difference between the sound in Spanish, as opposed to the way it sounds in the. Otherwise, why wouldn't we just say that the sound in Spanish is a voiced dental fricative. Are you saying that we should also not have a separate article for labiodental approximant or bilabial approximant? Nlsanand 00:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that about the labiodental approximant. My opposition to this page is the same as to Bilabial approximant. However, I do notice that the that page has a bit of history behind it, which implies some consensus on its existence.

There's a discussion in regards to the dental stops pages and it's looking like those will remain unmerged with the alveolar stops. Once that's agreed on, I'll be adding those pages to the template and at the same time I'll add the dental approximant. Ƶ§œš¹ _{[aɪm ˈfɻɛ̃ⁿdˡi]} 02:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)