Re: Information about the ten tribes in the On-Ogur Hungarian confereration.

Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Yusuf B Gursey wrote:
> > > ranjit_mathews@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >
> > > > > incidentally, Menges shows that in "long range" correspondences
> > > > > turkic /z/ corresponds to one type of dravidian r
> >
> > > > <zh> is the typical romanization of a Dravidian liquid an
> > > > ancient Indian phonetician called "a type of r". Examples: Kozhikode,
> > > > Tamizh.
> > >
> > > turkish r is NEVER confused with *zh* ,
> > > which exists as a seperaret
> > > phoneme coming from foreign (usually persian or french) words.
> >
> > Dravidian <zh> is nothing like that; it is frictionless. It is used for
>
> then don't render it with *zh*

I didn't define the convention of using zh for a frictionless
continuant; it just happens to be the convention that is currently
used. The provenance of the convention is conceivably a European's
mispronunciation of the sound. Alternatively, it might be because in
some dialects of Tamil, it has friction in some contexts - eg.
Vizhupuram, Thirukazhukunram.

> > I couldn't hear the
> > Turkish r trilled in a terminal position; it sounded substantially like
> > a Czech r^.
>
> your interpretation of turkish sounds has always been very peculiar,
> and others seem to debate you about english. in final position, turkish
> r even has a tendency to drop, similar to the nearly regular condition
> in Karachay.

On this page, I can hear terminal r trilled only in mIsIr and motor and
don't hear it dropped in any of the other words. I'm curious as to how
the other terminal r's sound to other non-Turks.
http://www.onlineturkish.com/pronun.asp

.

Relevant Pages