Talk:Tuvan language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Languages, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, and easy-to-use resource about languages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.	language Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.

	Tuvan language is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Central Asian portions of Iran and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale.
	After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.

Second link (http://www.enesay.com) does not seem to work Avihu 21:08, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tone?

Tuvan doesn't have any low tone vowels. They are pharyngealized even according to native linguists (see Bicheldei) --Stacey Doljack Borsody 22:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

David Harrison in his disseration disagrees with this. He says that earlier literature called this pharyngealization although the phonetics of these vowels were not investigated. The term was used perhaps through analogy with Even, which really does have pharyngealized vowels. Harrison says that these vowels clearly show a pitch contrast but no evidence of pharyngealization (which would be raised F1 and F2) or glottalization. But, he also says that an acoustic study needs to be undertaken. I dont know this literature, so maybe someone also already done such a study.

Anyway, I assume that Harrison has investigated this more thoroughly than others since he did look at F0, F1, F2 while they did not.

You can check it out yourself here: http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/dharris2/Harrison-Dissertation.pdf peace – ishwar  (speak) 03:53, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I've got a number of papers by Harrison (and have actually talked with him about the matter. He says it's definitely low tone and has the data to back it up. Thanks for the revert, Ish ishwar. Straughn 13:47, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, going back to my materials I see I was incorrect with stating there are no low tone vowels, but why, after all the time I've spent familiarizing myself with this language have I stuck with the idea of the 'kargyraa' vowels as cited by Bicheldei? If you read the grammar study by David Harrison and Gregory Anderson published by LINCOM they call them low pitch vowels (Remember that the book is mainly a field study of Kyzyl dialect). They also mention that some speakers have a 'distinct laryngeal posture' for these vowels, but argue that the defining characteristic isn't this. The defining characteristic among all speakers is a 'very low modal voice'. They also argue that these shouldn't be counted as a distinct vowel series but only as a 'suprasegmental feature', hence I propose that they shouldn't be listed in the vowel chart and a larger description of them be included in the article. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 17:53, 20 September 2006 (UTC)