Talk:Hungarian alphabet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] szóvégi H

László legutóbb átírta a bejegyzésemet.

[edit] méh

H /h/ 1. [ ɦ ] 2. ∅ 3. [ x ] 3. [ ç ] 1. when in intervocal position. 2. not rendered usually when in final position méh /meː/ 'bee', cseh /tʃɛ/ 'Czech (noun/adj.)' 3. seldom in final position, such as in doh 'dampness', méh 'uterus' 4. seldom, such as in ihlet 'inspiration', pech 'bad luck' (loanword from German)

A különbség az, hogy én a méh 'uterus' jelentésű szót is a néma H-s szavakhoz soroltam, ő pedig a [ x ]-esekhez.

Szerintem ez nem a "hivatalos" ejtése. Eleve, tudtommal veláris ("magas") magánhangó után a magyarban csak [ ç ] jöhet, már ez is gyanút kelt.

Szívesen hallanám mások véleményét a méh 'uterus' jelentésű szó helyes kiejtéséről. Orvos vélemények előnyben.

Köszi.

I have never heard it pronounced without the ending [x] in the "uterus" sense (not that this matters to the "official" pronunciation, but I have no better argument). Think about the pronunciation of all the possible compound words, e.g. "méhnyak", "méhszáj", "méhfal", "méhlepény", and compare "méhviasz", "méhkaptár", "méhraj" where the word is used in the "bee" sense. KissL 15:39, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] pech

László, a pech-et pedig kivenném a példák közül, mert nem a H betű ejtésére példa, hanem a [ ç ] hang létére. Remélem egyetértesz.


-- Szabi 10:58, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

You're right, I screwed up that one. I'll take it out now. KissL 15:39, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

So how is pech pronounced again? I don't read Hungarian, so I don't understand the above. And how is the digraph <ch> as in monarchia usually pronounced in Hungarian? --Iceager 01:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
AFAIK pech is pronounced [pɛç]. <ch> and <h> are just two different spellings for the same phoneme /h/ which has several allophones in certain positions (see above). /Perhaps <ch> is more often pronounced [x] or [ç] because it appears more frequently in "special" environments, eg in final position./ --Adolar von Csobánka (Talk) 21:00, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I thik it "ch" same as like chunoi same dialect pronounce hard same say 'unoi. But i dont know why? Elder_sun

[edit] Template

Does anyone else think that the whole Hungarian language area needs new templating (especially the alphabet part). I think we should base it on the Greek alphabet. It looks good. Any comments? somody 00:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pron(o)unciation

Ehm, brit angollal az pronOUnciation.... translation: "erm, in British English it is spelt pronOUnciation...." 85.248.66.2 22:17, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Those guys over there in Cambridge don't think so. KissL 10:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pronouncing a and á

A and Á are not the short and long versions of the same sound! While A is indeed /ɑ/ (at least in the standard dialect), Á is definitely different, I'd say /aː/. 195.56.26.108 06:11, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] English rendition of <ö>

English does not have any equivalent sound to <ö> and <ő>. Many of the English equivalents shown are only approximate anyway (e.g. those for <gy> and <ty>), but to render <ö> as the sound in shirley, early and burn is positively misleading. The sound in these words is [ɜ] (or its rhotic version [ɝ]) which is a central, unrounded vowel; [ø], on the other hand, is a front, rounded vowel. English does not have front rounded vowels, so the only useful course which won't completely confuse the user is to refer to sounds in other languages, e.g. German (as is indeed already done with <ü>). Vilĉjo 11:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

———

This is completely false. I am reverting the page back to the version that has those references, as the vowel ö is vocalized in exactly, and precisely in various words that I have included.

The Hungarian word sör (for beer), is pronounced, vocalized and sounds 100% accurately to the start of the name Shirley. If in Hungarian you say "Sör-li", you will have said the english name Shirley, precisely.

Any Hungarian person who pronounces these words below, will have said the english words following it PRECISELY.

Börli : Burly
Örli : Early
Szörli : Surly
Körli : Curly
Sörli : Shirley
Görli : Girly

This will be a precise pronunciation of those words in many dialects of the english language, most notably Canadian, American and British.

You will not revert the page back to what you personally believe it to be, as the fact and the proof stands. You are vandalising the page with your baseless edits. Any further reverting on your part will be negated by my reverting to the actual revision with my proof of the correct and accurate pronunciation. Good day.

DARK ANDY 15:56, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It would be more constructive if you could explain, rather than merely assert, your position. Do you hold that
  • it is incorrect to render the vowel in Hungarian sör as [ø]? Or
  • it is incorrect to render the vowel in English shirley as [ɜ]? Or
  • [ø] and [ɜ] are so close in pronunciation as to be, in your opinion, practically indistinguishable?
You have not addressed the fact that standard English does not have front rounded vowels. [ø] is by definition a front rounded vowel, as you will see from the linked article. Therefore, [ø] cannot occur as a sound in English, even if to some hearers it may sound a bit like [ɜ]. Vilĉjo 16:43, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

———

This is correct :

  • [ø] and [ɜ] are so close in pronunciation as to be, in your opinion, practically indistinguishable?

They are indistinguishable. It does not "sound a bit like", it sounds exactly like.

Please ask a Hungarian friend to vocalize any of the above words I have listed, and then you proceed by vocalizing the english word corresponding to the word he/she said. You will find no difference in the sound that both of you said, at all. None.

the link to the [ɜ] page also provided more words that are pronounced entirely, exactly, precisely, accurately and however else you want to say it, with a hungarian ö. The words there are Perfect, and Bird. Those are 2 more words that have a carbon copy vocalization of the hungarian vowel in it.

DARK ANDY 16:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying your point. Unfortunately, the vowels [ø] and [ɜ] are not the same; the International Phonetic Alphabet never uses two different symbols for the same sound. One is close-mid front rounded, the other open-mid central unrounded, and it is easy to both pronounce and hear the difference. These are facts which are easily ascertainable from the relevant articles. Which leads me to wonder whether Hungarian <ö> is not in fact pronounced [ø] – it is the only way in which your statements can be squared with the phonetic facts. I don't rule out that possibility, but unfortunately not only this article, but also this, this and this (and probably others besides) consistently transcribe Hungarian <ö> as [ø], so it is not just this article where you will need to be fighting your case. If [ø] is the correct transcription, then as I have already said, it cannot be "exactly like" any sound in standard English, as English does not have front rounded vowels (see English phonology). Vilĉjo 18:41, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

—————

While there may be 2 near identical version of the same sound, I will once again be forced to revert it to the correct version, as there is no differing way to pronounce the same vowel even if you tried. The people who will be looking up the pronunciations for the hungarian letters will not be phonetic experts, they will be normal people who want to know how to pronounce hungarian words more easily.

Any and every time you edit out the words I have put in I will revert them, simply due to the fact your argument leans on the fact that 2 near identical sounds are not the same, therefore you exclude it. It will not be excluded here, as I have provided proof of identical sounds for the same word before, more than once.

For the record, now that the text has been clarified I am content to leave it in its current form (though do we really need six examples of the sound in question??)
For future reference, it would help the tone of discussions if you could avoid casting accusations of "vandalism" when engaged in legitimate dispute over content. You may wish to consult Wikipedia:Vandalism, in particular What vandalism is not. Vilĉjo 12:37, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
I read your arguments back and forth, and as a native speaker of English and Hungarian, I have to say, "sörli" (pronounced according to Hungarian orthographic rules) and "Shirley" (pronounced according to American English orthographic rules) do not sound alike. Sorry, Blak Andy, they really don't, unless one pronounces "Shirley" with a thick Hungarian accent! One of my Hungarian neighbors pronounces them virtually the same. She also says "eksent" instead of "accent". That only proves that she can't pronounce "Shirley" correctly. I think this representation does a great disservice to Wikipedia and its readers. The same goes for "early" and "örli"--they are really not similar, and this contributes to the long-standing misunderstanding of the correct pronunciation of [œ] and [ø]. I think that the best way to describe [ø] and [y] would to call them like they are: a rounded [i] (or fronted [u]) and a rounded [e] (or fronted [o]). That is how I teach my choirs to pronounce them, and 99% of them have no problem at all with them.
While I'm glad that there is a note about "ő" being a more closed version of "ö," I wish that a symbol other than "ø" were used. Perhaps an "œ" with a mark that shows it's closer. In the same way, the "e" (short "e") is really somewhere between an [æ] and an [ε]. I really think we need our own symbol. Perhaps a small capital "E"? At any rate, there should really be some note that the actual pronunciation of short "e" is much more open than [ε] suggests. InFairness 10:24, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
C'mon! Don't propose using a new sign. Phonetics experts at ELTE Budapest, KLTE Debrecen, etc.. have examined the sounds. Let them decide for the "correct" IPA correspondence. Also note, that there is a difference whether you are talking about phonemes or phonetics. Even in the phonetic sense, you could use [ø:] for ő and [ø̞] for ö (that is, with the diacritic for "lowered"; it might possibly not be rendered in your browser), but definitely NOT [œ], not even with the diacritic for "raised" The quality of /ε/ depends on the dialact, in standard language it's definitely [ε]. You might speak Hungarian with an [æ] for /ε/ (again, you yourself state to have only beginner's proficiency in Hungarian (hu-1)), but please, let the exact phonetic values determine experts. Cite me ONE publication that claims standard Hungarian /ε/ to be [æ]! Again, please, don't confuse "how that sound seems to your ear". This is, especially for a non-native speaker not determinable. The same sound might sound for you more alike one sound and more alike an other sound for a Spaniard. This depends on your native phonetic and phonemic repertoire and system. (consider, notoriously, english soft and hard "th" ususally is rendered as s/z by French (with bad pronounciation) and t/d by Germans (again, if they cannot pronounce the same sound), even though both have all the four sounds in their repertoire to pick from, they just "sound" differently to them (that's of course subjective)!.
By the way, that's the same mistake someone did formerly in this topic... Shirley‘s vowel and sör‘s vowel are of course completely different. For an average Hungarian, (who does not speak English), however, Shirley's vowel will sound most similar to ö; on the other hand, for an English native speaker, sör's vowel will sound most similar to (English) e, both of course being "wrong". From this fact it's easy to conclude, that DARK ANDY is a Hungarian, who might be good in English writing, but is bad in pronounciation (probably never lived in UK/US, started learning English at an advanced age (i.e. after the age of 14), and is generally uneducated or unintellectual enough not to be able to part himself from the egocentric world view (which is natural and inherent to humans). Anyway, I digress. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Szabi (talk • contribs) 23:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ö, ő, ü, ű

The article has this to say about ö: The same as Ő, only shorter, while, according to it, ő is the same as Ö, only held longer. This is incorrect: ő and ű are definitely more closed than their shorter counterparts in (standard, present-day) Hungarian. I am a native speaker and I can confirm this, but here is an on-line resource which states the same: [1] (in Hungarian). Any Hungarian can differentiate between (and pronounce differentiably) költő ('poet') and *költöö. KovacsUr 14:20, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Kovacs! I had two idiots, way back when this page was pretty new, trying to convince me and any who read this page that "ő" and "ö" were the same quality of sound, only differin in quantity. That, of course is bikaszar, but they consistently blocked any of my changes. I wish someone could answer why people keep insisting that "ő" and "ö" differ only in length. That is absolutely untrue, and literally anyone who isn't deaf can tell the difference. InFairness 10:30, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
Take a step back, InFairness! (a) the language you use is not apt for this place. (b) you claim on your own page to be hu-1 user only, so how dare you judge about the correct quality of those sounds in Hungarian?!
For a matter of fact, long ö is indeed a slightly more closed that ö and long ü is again slightly more closed than ü on average, according to the phonetics textbook. Of course, they are the same prototypically. The difference is minute, and a Hungarian not especially educated in phonetics would never call the two different. While they would not call the two different, it's possible, that they could hear a difference between ő and öö, as KovacsUr put it, if they were played after each other. However, to come back to your example, noone would say "you pronounced that wrong" if you said, what you wrote as *költöö. For that the difference is to little, and öö is well in the range of allophones for ő as well! While I think that is a very, very important point (that the long ő pronounced with the openness of the ö is still within the acceptable range), it's true, that the middle of the range of realisations is more closed in the long case. I might make a correction/addition to include that, once I find a good wording. Szabi 23:36, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] h=ch?

Is it true that both of these represent /h/ and same various allophones?Cameron Nedland 23:44, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's the current linguistic viewpoint. However note that ch as opposed to ty, gy, ny, sz, etc., etc. is a digraph which is not considered a letter of its own right and is consequently collated as <c>+<h>. Also ch can only be found in foreign words.
Hungarian orthography writes foreign words, after they have become common, according to Hungarian pronunciation, i.e. changes how to write it. C.f. pullóver, partizán, gerilla, akvarell etc.
Two main exceptions are:
  1. x is changed to gz if it has [gz] value, but stays x if it has [ks] value. egzakt but szexuális, taxi...
  2. ch that represents a H-like sound in the source language retains its form. (Such not English ch which has a different value) e.g. technika, mechanikus, pech etc.
See also point 204 of the Hungarian Orthography: [2] Szabi 16:45, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
Just making sure. Polish is similar, but both represent /x/.Cameron Nedland 01:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
Well, polish is not 100% analogy, as in polish you've got h and ch both in native words (if I recall it correctly). In Hungarian words containing ch are always identified as words with clearly foreign origin, and the spelling is retained (if you will) for respect of the borrower language. (kindof). Szabi 12:47, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
True, but what I was getting at was that they make the same sound(s).Cameron Nedland (talk) 19:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
And just for the record, in Polish the standard or basic realisation is /x/, in Hungarian /h/.Szabi (talk) 12:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
True.Cameron Nedland (talk) 20:08, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Pullóver or pulóver? I'm sure that's the best example, because it has two changes, not just a single one. Atyauristen 02:45, 19 December 2007 (CET)