Talk:Linguolabial consonant

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

Untitled

Why is the diacritic placed on dentals in some cases, and on bilabials in others? I don't think it much matters, but the article implies this is sanctioned by the IPA, which I don't believe it is. kwami 20:47, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)

The article is incorrect:p 193 of the Handbook of the IPA has a chart of ExtIPA symbols for disordered speech, and the linguolabial column has all dental/alveolar consonants (t, d, n, r, theta, eth, and l), with the "seagull below" diacritic. Nohat 21:07, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

They're used for non-pathological speech as well, in Melanesia. If I remember correctly, there's a dispute over whether linguo-labials are a subcategory of the labials or of the coronals, so that choosing either m or n as the base letter makes a theoretical claim: there's no phonetic difference. But I do think it's weird to mix them up. kwami 23:15, 2005 Jun 6 (UTC)

Ladefoged classifies the linguolabials as coronal, so I'm changing the template. The <m> needs to be fixed here too; might get to it some day. kwami 23:26, 2005 July 28 (UTC)

Varieties of linguolabial trill

Was hoping to get some clarification on the varieties here. I can do three types of linguolabial trill - Bronx cheer and two that sound like bilabial trills but use the tongue instead of one of the lips (this Youtube video has the linguolabial trill with the upper lip as its second/middle example as part of an attempt to each how to do an alveolar trill). What would the proper nomenclature be for each of these three varieties of trill? -- 213.176.153.100 (talk) 12:49, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

oh after 11 years it still just has the one kind... Idk if anyone will ever actually fix this 2601:280:4980:4620:A119:8DE9:10D:4804 (talk) 05:06, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possible presence in ancient Greek?

Is there any evidence for (or against) the possibility that the combinations πτ, βδ, φθ and μν might have originally represented linguolabial consonants and that they might have later been replaced by spelling pronunciations? Kostaki mou (talk) 04:26, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It rather is unlikely, and an extraordinary hypothesis needs extraordinary evidence. And there seems to be no shred of evidence to even suggest the possibility. --JorisvS (talk) 10:32, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mere speculation is not a crime. I am not proclaiming it as fact. I was only asking if there was any such extraordinary evidence. You do not provide any evidence to the contrary (such as providing earlier forms, for example). You are simply shouting me down. Kostaki mou (talk) 19:53, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence that the Greeks lived on the Moon before they moved to Greece? (Please do not tell me there is no evidence, and do not shout me down.) — kwami (talk) 21:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're being ridiculous. My speculation is far from outlandish and is not unique to me. Kostaki mou (talk) 23:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are any academics of the opinion? Have they been published? This isn't a forum for speculation. — Lfdder (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I don't know. Who are you kidding? The talk pages are rife with exactly this kind of speculation. Frankly, I find the response to my question quite childish and downright hysterical. I think it's a darn good question (and that's all I am presenting it as). Kostaki mou (talk) 00:07, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The question was fine. But when you were told there was no evidence for it, you are the one who got hysterical, complaining that "speculation is not a crime" and "you are simply shouting me down". — kwami (talk) 00:34, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

it seems to me that nobody here wishes to speculate. Maybe try asking on reddit or Unilang – though I don't see what the point would be. — Lfdder (talk) 00:56, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There seemed to me to be the distinct implication that it was ridiculous for me even to ask the question. Perhaps I misunderstood the statement that "there seems to be no shred of evidence to even suggest the possibility" to mean that it was ridiculous of me even to suggest the possibility (which I don't think it was). Kostaki mou (talk) 01:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I read it as meaning there's not a shred of evidence, but then I tend to take people literally. — kwami (talk) 04:31, 8 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coronal or Labial?

Which are they? I seems to me we must swap positions with Labiodentals. יהודה שמחה ולדמן (talk) 12:15, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They're coronal. What do you mean by 'swap positions' with labiodentals? Labiodentals are clearly labial. 2606:6000:69C6:9600:8DB:81F4:7EF3:CE59 (talk) 00:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Linguolabial consonant. 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/20070623145306/http://www.linguistics.berkeley.edu/~rosemary/55-fall2003-onomatopoeia.pdf to http://www.linguistics.berkeley.edu/~rosemary/55-fall2003-onomatopoeia.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sources for expansion

The following source may be of use in the expansion of this article.

Lynch, John (2003). "The bilabials in Proto Loyalties". In Lynch, John (ed.). Issues in Austronesian historical phonology. pp. 166–168. ISBN 0858835037.

Wugapodes [t^hɑk] [ˈkan.ˌʧɹɪbz] 06:14, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Linguolabial Trill Correction

It is NOT the same as "blowing a raspberry" that's a different articulation. Linguolabial Trill can be pronounced as a usual trill in the same spot as the rest of the linguolabial consonants.

It sounds really cool too nothing like a fart. I think blowing a raspberry would need to be defined under a different like bilinguolabial trill but you can also do that as a whole different trill articulated with both.

So maybe they are both just linguolabial, but it shouldn't SPECIFY bottom lip when the top lip one is more in line with the meaning of "linguolabial" and pretending only the fart noise kind exists is misleading for those using IPA especially for conlang phonology choice. 2601:280:4980:4620:A119:8DE9:10D:4804 (talk) 05:04, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]