Pronunciation of Spanish

Hi Aldo and Gabriel,

I'm afraid that I don't understand you either Aldo. You were neglecting the lack of distinction between 'b' and 'v', based on the argument that no confusion arises by pronouncing both as an identical sound, but now you use the opposite reasoning to favourise the 'correct' pronountiation of 's', why?

>Image for a second that letter 'D' now sounds like a 'T' or 'R' like a 'L' and so on, is it healthy for a language and communication ? of course not.
And you remember for a second that the letter 'V' nowadays sounds like a 'B' (a completely different sound, produced by different parts of the mouth)... is it UNhealthy for Spanish and communication ?

I would like to know which criterion do you use to judge that.

¡Pura vida!

Hola Sergio,

No I don't think so, if you look at it closer you will see that I defend the uniformity in the pronounciation of letters. Why to make distinction between 'v' and 'b' ? and why to pronounce the 's' or 'r' or whatever using other letters' sound ? Simply there is not any reason.

I think Spanish phonetically has one of the most simple or basic systems where subtle differences are completely irrelevant unlike for example languages like English, Chinese or French. So I vote for keeping such condition.

Hi Aldo,

>where subtle differences are completely irrelevant
Yes, but then, pronouncing 's' like surely both of us do, and pronouncing it aspirated as in many other Spanish speaking regions should suit in this 'subtle difference' cathegory as well, shouldn't it? and therefore, completely irrelevant... but you seem not to admit the aspirated 's' as an irrelevant difference....

>Why to make distinction between 'v' and 'b' ?
Theoretically, because they are indeed different sounds, and there is a phonetic distance between them. You (and me and millions of Spanish speakers) are just used to make no difference between them when speaking and listening. The difference between 'b' and 'v' is just a bit softer than the difference between 'p' and'f' respectively, only nobody does it anymore.

So using your reasoning -why to pronounce the 's' or 'r' or whatever using other letters' sound ?- inversely, I would set the question: why to pronounce a letter ('v') using other letter's sound ('b')?
I can think of an answer: because languages evolve and change, and their sounds may merge (this case) and split (the case of 's') as the time goes by. If nobody complains about the merging, why should one then complain about the splitting?

I remark that I don't have any problem with anybody pronouncing 'v' and 'b' the same in Spanish, just to avoid a useless discussion. I used this only as an example.

Sergio

<<I would set the question: why to pronounce a letter ('v') using other letter's sound ('b')? >>

Based on what do you assume in Spanish 'v' has been different from 'b', on Latin, celtiberian languages, ancient Spanish ?

<<and pronouncing it aspirated as in many other Spanish speaking regions should suit in this 'subtle difference' cathegory as well, shouldn't it? and therefore, completely irrelevant...>>

For now it is wrong and irrelevant until it turns unintelligible.

<<but you seem not to admit the aspirated 's' as an irrelevant difference....>>

I think "aspirated 's'" is just an elegant definition for an incorrect pronounciation, I call it: to pronounce the 's' like a 'j', that's it.

Note that such incorrect ways to pronounce the words definitevely are not part of any Spanish rule and are not taught anywhere. They are mere localisms.

Hi Guest (I presume that you are Aldo and forgot to sign your post),

>Based on what do you assume in Spanish 'v' has been different from 'b', on Latin, celtiberian languages, ancient Spanish ?
On Latin, ancient Spanish, and Spanish up to the XIX Century. At a certain point, both sounds merged into one. Besides, according to what should two different symbols if they were not originally used for representing two different sounds?... who would agree with such a waste of time and source of confusion? as a part of the evolution in the case of Sp, one of the sounds has being fading away, till people will never use the 'v' sound at all. Who guarantees you that a sort of phenomenon is not already happening to the aspirated 's'? did you know how many sibilants there were in Sp "only" 6 Centuries ago?

>For now it is wrong and irrelevant until it turns unintelligible.
???? so, for example, the Costarrican 'rr' could also be wrong even if it remains irrelevant? the Latinamerican pronountiation of 'c' and 'z' as a 's' are wrong but irrelevant?... in both cases you would be wrong as well, but you are not criticising these items, are you?... who sets the boundaries of correctedness? about being unintelligible, let's not exaggerate things... the fact that one can considere aspirated 's' (me, for instance) as annoying is another story.

>I think "aspirated 's'" is just an elegant definition for an incorrect pronounciation, I call it: to pronounce the 's' like a 'j', that's it.
If you hear it like a 'j', then no wonder you are not capable of hearing the difference between 'b' and 'v' my friend. You cannot judge sounds in a language according to which ones suit to you and which ones do not.

>such incorrect ways to pronounce the words definitevely are not part of any Spanish rule
Question: are Latinamerican 'c' and 'z' part of the Spanish rule?

At the end of the day, I am trying to say that every variant of Spanish which is not ours and which we are not used to, will always sound either strange, funny or annoying, depending on each case, but there is no region, including Spain, where the pronounciation is perfect according to the norm.

Sergio,

Ok, I will resume the idea in just one question.

A Nicaraguan says 'puéj' instead of 'pués'
A Cuban says 'señol' instead of 'señor'
An Argentinian says 'shamar' instead of 'llamar'
A Chilean says 'shraer' instead of 'traer' (you know what I mean)
A Venezuelan says 'vamo' instead of 'vamos'

Which is the correct way, the first one or the second one ?

Must exist one, otherwise forget the phonetic rules and teach Spanish without them if you can.

For me it's way clear that the boundaries of correctness were overrode ?

Hi Aldo,

>....otherwise forget the phonetic rules and teach Spanish without them if you can.
Show me please one single language on the earth which strictly follows its own phonetic rules.

>For me it's way clear that the boundaries of correctness were overrode ?
As they were overrode in the transition of 'v' to 'b', and in the transition from a system of six sibilants into only two, in the transition from ancient Spanish 'j' to nowadays Spanish 'j'. If you were born after all those changes, you don't see them as something important. Why are the variants in pronountiation that exist nowadays something undesirable to you, and not only a part of linguistic evolution?

Again, I am from central Mexico, and you know how we speak Spanish, I may not like all the above mentioned 'out of the standard' pronountiations, but I cannot try to supress them either because I don't have the right to say that my Spanish pronountiation follows the standard hundred percent!!!!.... nor your does it.

My question still stands unanswered: what do you think of the Costarrican 'rr', which doesn't sound like the standard at all? can you imagine the reaction of my friends for instance, if I would start using this sound when I speak?..... nonetheless, it is surely completely normal for you, isn't it?

I insist that it is impossible to set the boundaries for pronountiation of a language, even if some of the variants are unpleasant for our ears. As for your examples, I happen to like the 4th and 5th ones, but I have to accept the other ones (confusion of 'r' with 'l' is going too far in my opinion and with all respect from Cubans and Puertorricans though) because I don't feel the right to be that selective.

Just learn Spanish from Mexico, is the most neutral one, they pronounce each word as it should be pronounced, as simple as that.

It seems silly to have to say this, but I think there is so much confusion here:

Letters are symbols on paper or on a computer screen. They're a (more or less) arbitrary representations of spoken language. They come much later than human language. They were intended to aid communication, not dictate it.

Phonemes (usually represented by symbols between //) are generalizations or mental representations of the basic sound units of a language. Spanish has five vowel phonemes /a/, /e/, /i/, /o/, and /u/. They have the ability of distinguishing words, so that PERRO /"pero/ is different from PERRA /"pera/.

Sounds are physical entities, vibrations of air produced by muscular action of the organs of speech in a special configuration. They are usually represented between []. So /"pero/ is usually realized as ["perO], because, in unstressed positions, /o/ is usually realized as [O] in Spanish. These are the phonetic rules that linguists are after. Even languages with no written form have phonetic rules.

Now, as for Aldo's amusing and misinformed response:

<<'S' has been 'S' for centuries and for lots of languages.>>

By this he presumably means to say that the letter 'S' has represented the phoneme /s/ for centuries and for many languages.

A couple of counter-examples: In English, the letter 'S' can represent /s/, /z/, /S/ or /Z/ (or even ZERO realization as in AISLE or CORPS). In French, it can represent /s/ /z/ or ZERO.

<<Image for a second that letter 'D' now sounds like a 'T' or 'R' like a 'L' and so on, is it healthy for a language and communication ? of course not.>>

In English, the letter 'T' usually represents the phoneme /t/ which can be realized as [t] in TOO, as [p] in THAT BOY, as [k] in COULDN'T COME, as [?] in FOOTBALL, as [4] in American BETTER, etc. Communication does not suffer at all.


<<by the way, do you have [s] or [z] in "desde"?).>>

dessssssde, and you ? dejjjjjjjde ?>>

Most speakers of Latin American Spanish have [z] in DESDE (a voiced version of [s]) so perhaps you should listen to yourself with a critical ear before attempting to be sarcastic.
The faux-netic spelling of "dejde" for my own realization is completely inappropriate. The letter "J" usually represents the phoneme /x/ realized always as [x] or [X] in the Rio de la Plata. My pronunciation of DESDE is /"desde/ realized (by perfectly clear and strict phonetic rules) as ["dehDE].

The rule in a simplified form is:
/s/ ---> [s] before a vowel or a pause
/s/ ---> [h] before a consonant

The variations that are discussed above (b vs. v, ll vs. y, etc.) are only problems for WRITING Spanish. For reading, Spanish may have the clearest orthography of any major language. A Spaniard will pronounce z like th, a Mexican like s, most will pronounce b and v the same, some people will pronounce the s and other drop it, and you may have three or more pronounciations of ll, depending on where you're from. It doesn't matter. A native will pronounce it consistently his way. And a second language student, having learned one system (let's say Mexican or Spanish pronounciation) should be able to pronounce EVERY Spanish word correctly according to that system.

With German you don't always know the stress, and with Italian, you have to learn whether it's a long or short vowel. Other than constructed languages like Esperanto, or languages that got an alphabet recently, like Swahili, Spanish has the most predictable orthography.

Sergio,

<<Show me please one single language on the earth which strictly follows its own phonetic rules.>>

I'm speaking about teaching. So show me one which doesn't follow them.

<<the fact that one can considere aspirated 's' (me, for instance) as annoying is another story. >>
<<I insist that it is impossible to set the boundaries for pronountiation of a language, even if some of the variants are unpleasant for our ears.>>

You have mentioned this more than once so I'd like to ask you, WHY? Do such pronunciations override your own personal and internal boundaries of correctness (or standardization) ?

<<what do you think of the Costarrican 'rr', which doesn't sound like the standard at all? can you imagine the reaction of my friends for instance, if I would start using this sound when I speak?..... nonetheless, it is surely completely normal for you, isn't it? >>

No, it isn't. Of course we note it and even we make fun of it, and of course nobody should learn it or teach it although the difference is relatively subtle. The 'rr' still sounds as 'rr' with certain intonation but at least there is not a replacing with other known letter. The 'tr' is way more serious (more than Chileans) and again we note it and make fun of it. Personally I always try to avoid such sounds which are completely incorrect.

<<I am from central Mexico, and you know how we speak Spanish, I may not like all the above mentioned 'out of the standard' pronountiations, but I cannot try to supress them either because I don't have the right to say that my Spanish pronountiation follows the standard hundred percent!!!!.... nor your does it.

Why not ? Then nobody would have the 'right' to say that 'haiga' and 'hubieron' are not correct words anymore.

How could you say that there is not problem with words like 'toes', 'cajetera', 'puelta', 'danier', 'ejta' which probably you can't understand at least a couple of them if you listen them ?

And my question still stands unanswered: if you were a Spanish teacher, would you teach this forms as valid and correct forms to your pupils ? I don't think so.

Hi Aldo,

>I'm speaking about teaching. So show me one which doesn't follow them.
Either I didn't read well, and in this case we have being talking about something different, but I understood that you were talking about the fact that other pronounciations of 's' were wrong, to which I insist, as long as your pronountiation doesn't follow the rules either, other pronounciations aren't wrong either.

By teaching Spanish in the school or to foreigners things change, because you should use the rules as a reference to teach, no matter how people pronounce the language in the street (which at the end of the day is how people end speaking though)....

>You have mentioned this more than once so I'd like to ask you, WHY?
Sorry, I didn't understand you here, if you mean 'why aspirated 's' bothers me a bit', then:
Because I am not used to it and simply don't like it that much. It doesn't have anything to do with correctedness, and I am frankly unable to set the boundaries to it.

>Why not ? Then nobody would have the 'right' to say that 'haiga' and 'hubieron' are not correct words anymore.
Here you are talking about using different (incorrect from the point of view of unified rules) words in the written language. There is a well established grammar and ortography and there is no chance to justify using incorrect words/letters/written symbols, because the boundaries are quite clear here. A finite and well defined number of letters in the alphabet to represent the written language.

The phonetic system of a language is not so easy to define.

>How could you say that there is not problem with words like 'toes', 'cajetera', 'puelta', 'danier', 'ejta' which probably you can't understand at least a couple of them if you listen them ?
Come on, you will understand them out of the context. Would you feel compelled to explain to a Spaniard with your CR accent the difference between 'cierra' and 'sierra' with your CR accent?

Don't you think that someone whose mother tongue is not Spanish would think that it would be easier to be able to distinguish 'bazo' from 'vaso', 'halla' from 'haya' out of the pronountiation (which was the case in the past)?

What is your opinion on these examples? why should we have a redundant ortography in our language? If we can live with it, then we surely can live with your examples as well.....

>if you were a Spanish teacher, would you teach this forms as valid and correct forms to your pupils ?
Simple answer: No. But I can avoid their use among them because these forms are *alive* in our language, if you like it or not.

Aldo and Sergio: you both seem to believe that phonetic rules mediate the transition between orthography and pronunciation. You're wrong. Phonetic rules mediate the transition between phonemes (as mental representations, however abstract that sounds) and actual articulations of words in context, of derived words, etc. Writing and orthography have nothing to do with it. At some point of the history of languages someone sits down and assigns written symbols to sounds or combination of sounds. To presume that this act should dictate the articulation of all the generations that come afterwards is supremely ridiculous.

Some practical spanish pronunciation .
son of the moon: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufYimFxIJdw
I think this is an easy song to follow and in addition it's translated into english . Can you tell me if you find the pronunciation easy or difficult to understand?
Thanks,