1990/12/01 by John Catford · 1 citation
Psychology · Arts and Humanities · Mathematics · #Phonetics and Phonology Research #Linguistics and language evolution #Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation #Consonant #Breathy voice #Syllabic verse #Linguistics #Tone (literature) #Mathematics #Obstruent #Voice #Speech recognition #Computer science #Vowel #Phonation #Philosophy
paper · doi:10.1017/s0025100300004229
openalex publication_date 1990/12/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/06/30
I am in favor of letting [h] and [ɦ] stay where they are as glottal fricatives—honorary glottal fricatives, if you like! What the preceding paper says about them is true—there tends to be noticeable glottal turbulence with [h] only occasionally, particularly before open [a]-type vowels (or after them, in languages with final [h]'s). The voiced counterpart is perhaps more likely to have some turbulent glottal flow, being, in fact breathy or whispery voice. My reason for wanting to keep [h] and [ɦ] in the chart is perhaps more phonological and practical than strictly phonetic. There are so many languages in which one or both of these sounds functions as a syllabic margin—as a term in a series of consonants—that one often wants to put them in a chart of consonants. In Caucasian languages [h] often coexists in the consonant system alongside [ʔ], and (e.g. in dialects of Agul) alongside [ʔ], [ʡ], [ħ], [ʕ], [H] and [ʢ].