Talk:Implosive consonant

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Phonetics Task Force.

N. Amer implosives

yes, only in Maidu, as far as I know. so i dont claim that they are "widespread". but, nevertheless, they do occur outside of Africa & SE Asia (which seem to receive all the attention). cheers — ishwar (SPEAK) 15:05, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

They also occur in Pakistan, Siberia, the Amazon, etc., but I was just trying to give an idea of where they were particularly prevalent. (Interesting that they seem to be entirely absent from Australia, even from Damin!) We should obviously give more detail, but NA without the other places is a little misleading, I think. Let me see what I can come up with. kwami 18:14, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

yes, i think it would be very nice to note the distribution of less-known/uncommon segments for wikipedia readers. (would be interesting for me, too) — ishwar (SPEAK) 18:58, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

They're also found in a southern Siberian language, perhaps Ket. I can't confirm that, though, so I'm leaving it out. kwami 19:09, 2005 Jun 11 (UTC)

What does "modal-voiced" mean? O'RyanW (☺ ₪) 04:16, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Normal voice, at a pinch. See Phonation. --Tropylium (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To do

Article needs to mention recent phonetical and phonological studies according to which the defining caracteristic of implosivs isn't the glottalization, but the non-explosion; which, phonologically, makes them basically non-obstruent stops... --Tropylium (talk) 22:34, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

They can be both phonologically. But, phonetically, they are only nonobstruents. And it's not all that recent. I added some note to this effect. – ishwar (speak) 22:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any published source supporting the claim that "implosives are phonetically sonorants"? I'd like to know where to find that. Also it would be nice to include this reference in the text. Landroving Linguist (talk) 10:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Voiceless implosives

Anyone know why these were withdrawn from the IPA? -- Evertype·✆ 07:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

AFAIK, these sounds were judged too rare to be worth keeping, since they could be easily replaced by a diacritic (even though the voiceless diacritic does not capture them accurately). How they continue to justify [ɧ] is beyond me. kwami (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation? It seems odd to get rid of symbols just because they are rare. -- Evertype·✆ 11:36, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note the "AFAIK". It's what I remember having read, but I don't remember where. kwami (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might be able to find some discussion of this in the IPA journal around 1989. They mentioned a number of opinions on different things, but I cant remember if they mentioned this. They were added (by, I assume, phoneticians), but apparently the decisions can be overruled by an IPA council (or whatever the group of folks who did this is called). – ishwar (speak) 22:08, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have found that Serer has three places of articulation, more than were known when the phonetic symbol guide was written. Will add that in when I find out which they are. kwami (talk) 19:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sound files, please

The article on ejectives concludes with a short set of sound files. This article would benefit from such a thing. — Solo Owl (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, we could add them. They exist: individual articles have one, eg [ɓ]. Could be something like the chart in this one. But for me, not today ;-) -DePiep (talk) 18:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Implosive fricatives (and affricates)?

I can clearly see a pattern: ejectives are only voiceless, implosives are only voiced. But there are frics and affrics ejectives and there'ren't any Fs&Afs implosives. Impossible to pronounce? Don't appear in any natlang? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.185.56.194 (talk) 02:29, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There are voiceless implosives, they're just rare (and they're only partially voiceless, granted). As the name implies with "plosive" in it, there can't be implosive fricatives because the air has to be blocked above the larynx somewhere. Affricates may be possible (which would be just a sequence of an implosive and a normal fricative at the same place of articulation), but I doubt they exist contrastively. Nardog (talk) 04:29, 13 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implosives in Europe

I'm assuming this is only referring to phonemicity? Ingrian for instance shows [ɓ] as a dialectal realisation of /p/ between voiced sounds (the usual realisation being [b̥]; per Kuznecova 2009). I'm assuming this is not unique? Then maybe it's a good idea to review the current wording of that section. Thadh (talk) 15:46, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thadh: Occurrence refers to the phonetic presence of the sound, although we should always clarify about phonemicity too. We mention e.g. British English in ejective consonants. It will be great if you can add the Ingrian example here. –Austronesier (talk) 19:56, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Implosive symbols

In all the implosive articles, we used the outdated symbols for voiceless implosives. Shouldn't we fix that? PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 16:45, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]