Reconstruction talk:Proto-Indo-Iranian/ćatám

Which is the pronunciation of C with circumflex?--Manfariel (talk) 15:38, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Probably roughly [tʃ], i.e. as in English ch: some kind of a palatal affricate, but less palatal than *č. --Tropylium (talk) 18:13, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

More likely [t͡ɕ], that's why the symbol ć is used, based on Polish orthography. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:20, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Correct, ć = /tś/ = [tɕ], though I would fervently depute it being "based on Polish". --{{victar|talk}} 04:29, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Why? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 20:42, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

@Florian Blaschke: Because ‹c› is commonly used to represent /ts/ and an acute mark is commonly used to denote palatalization. Nothing to do with Polish, specifically. --{{victar|talk}} 23:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Well, where in turn does the idea to use ‹c› to represent /ts/ and to use an acute accent to denote palatalisation (and especially alveolo-palatal consonants) come from, then? --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

See Ç. --{{victar|talk}} 06:04, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't explain the acute accent. Polish ć plainly denotes [t͡ɕ]; for whatever cryptic reason, you're denying the obvious explanation in favour of an incredibly far-fetched and unsatisfying one that just doesn't even work. That's not how reasoning works; that's just a reach. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

And where do you think using ‹ć› for /tɕ/ in Polish originates? C has long well-documented history of thousands of years of representing palatal stops and alveolar affricates, from Latin to English. Trying to suggest Polish invented its use is rather silly. --{{victar|talk}} 14:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

The use of diacritics in slavic latin ortography originates from the czech Jan Hus. Polish uses the acute for affricates, just like latin based croat. The use of czech diacritics in linguistics spread from istitutions like the Prague school, I think, and thanks to linguists like Jakobson and Trubeckoj. So there may be an influence of polish in the usage of this diacritic on <c>, even though we can't be sure. As far as I know other european languages don't use this sort of diacritics, prefering other solutions like digraphs. E.g. In italian <c> and <g> represent velars (eg. cane 'dog'), unless written before front vowels, in this case they represent affricates. To represent velars before front vowel we use digraphs <ch> and <gh> (eg. chi 'who'), and to represent affricates before other vowels we use digraphs <ci> and <gi> (eg. ciao 'hello'), sometimes even before <e> (eg. cielo 'sky'). This system most evidently isn't suitable for phonemic transcription 151.67.248.41 11:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Source

Is there a source to cite in papers regarding this material? 151.67.248.41 11:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC)