Appendix talk:Alemannic German pronunciation

Doubled consonants

Are there really minimal pairs between /t/ and /tː/ (or with /p/ similarly)? To me the difference between Lade and Latte is between [d̥]/[t] and that's how Fleischer/Schmid describe it too. Also am not sure that the doubled nasals are phonemic in Zurich, where they also appear short – but probably they are in other dialects. Ƿidsiþ 06:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Widsith I'm still thinking about minimal pairs between /t/<>/tː/ and /p/<>/pː/. It could be that [tː pː] are non-free allophones of /t p/, but there's no doubt that the phones exist in many dialects (including mine). I actually think Zürich is somewhat of an outlier in this regard (together with other, similar northern Switzerland varieties) in that they don't have many long phonemes in general, so it's probably best to not generalize based on the Zürich dialect. See for instance this table from this paper (I've only skimmed through it quickly). I pronounce all words there with long phonemes except for Wiese and Kilo. In case you're interested, the study also presents a regional three-way fortis distinction: lenis, fortis, extrafortis. On page 9, they present a Sandhi process which could cause /pː/ to be phonemic, though I'm not sure. Fytcha (talk) 13:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

It's a really interesting study! But their category of ‘extrafortis’ seems to be an allophonic variant that is produced when a short vowel proceeds a long consonant, which would imply that there are no minimal pairs that arise from this interpretation. However, if you do feel these sounds as independent sounds, it could be that we still consider them phonemic, I just don't think it is the case in Zurich (which is all I am really equipped to work on anyway). Ƿidsiþ 13:45, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I will keep thinking about it and if I really can't come up with anything I'll consider listing [tː pː] as mere positional variants. The best I can think of right now are suprasegmental constructions like "d Träne" which (I think) can be pronounced either as [tːr-] by Sandhi or with an awkward intermediate release ~[d̥ʰtr-] / [d̥θ̠ tr-] / ... no idea how to even transcribe this one :). Fytcha (talk) 14:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

This I think is for sure often realised as [tːˈrænə] by sandhi, but phonemically it's /d̥ ˈtrænə/. At least that's how I would describe it. Ƿidsiþ 14:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure I'm following. If definiteness is only marked by length (in the sandhi realization), giving us the minimal pair [tr-] and [tːr-], how does that not make [tː] phonemic? Fytcha (talk) 15:12, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it is if it's something that emerges only over word boundaries. But anyway I'm now doubting myself, because in Fleischer/Schmid they describe sandhi as working slightly differently, not creating geminate consonants in such cases but combining them into a single fortis, as in /əz̥ hæt tiər/ ==> [əz̥ hæ‿tiər], or /əz̥ hæt d̥iəb̥/ ==> [əz̥ hæ‿tiəb̥]. How exactly this analysis works with d, I don't know, but I find the sandhi effects with definite articles in Swiss German incredibly confusing at the best of times (like I often hear d Frau pronounced as something like pFrau…). Ƿidsiþ 18:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I'm honestly not qualified enough to judge the phonemicity so I'm just going to keep thinking about minimal pairs involving just one word. As to the last part of your message: Yes, lots of weird phonological stuff is happening with those definite articles (they're basically just consonant cluster complexifiers after all). I have heard "pFrau" before (assimilation of place of articulation) but there seem to be multiple competing realizations of that cluster (as is the case for the one I've mentioned above). Fytcha (talk) 19:03, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: "To me the difference between Lade and Latte is between [d̥]/[t]" It was my mistake to include northern Switzerland in that row. I've fixed it now. Fytcha (talk) 13:20, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• FYI the chapter on Bernese in this book argues convincingly for a three-way distinction between devoiced/voiceless/geminate based on historical development and on moraic analysis. In that reading, it is something determined by phonetic environment (he says, for instance, that a Swiss-German word of form CVC is not permitted unless either the vowel is long CV:C or the final consonant is geminated CVC: to give it enough syllabic ‘weight’), so I'm not really sure if it has any impact on the phoneme inventory. I found it convincing though. Ƿidsiþ 07:11, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Widsith: Unfortunately, I don't have access to that book, nor do I find it on the internet after a quick look. It does sound interesting though. Which consonants do they argue it for? Just the stops? Fytcha (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

  Yeah, just the stops. Ƿidsiþ 06:30, 2 December 2021 (UTC)