Talk:Alveolo-palatal lateral approximant

[lʲ] = [lj] in Portuguese?
The note of "sandália" in Portuguese is just not true, there's not such a statement in the referred source (and I checked it, I'm not saying this just because I disagree. Also, the source checks the note of "ralho"), that page actually says that [lʲ] is an variation of [ʎ] in Brazilian Portuguese, and not only a speech defect. Besides, as a native speaker (of Portuguese of Portugal), I know there is a distinction between the sounds, recognized among the population as well; "sandália" contains [lj], while "ralho" contains [lʲ]. Perhaps the lack of distinction happens only in some areas, and that would require another source. JMCF125 (talk) 19:17, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. We generally should have only one example per language anyway.  I've removed the sandália example, though the source currently cited, Cruz-Ferreira (1995), doesn't actually say that the sound is alveolo-palatal.  I wouldn't be surprised though if it were true, though.  — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]  20:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. But I can ensure it is not alveolo-palatal, not even when talking quickly, at least in Portuguese of Portugal. JMCF125 (talk) 13:39, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Can you reliably distinguish between a palatalized alveolar, an alveolo-palatal, and a (dorso)-palatal? --JorisvS (talk) 13:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * He's saying there's contrast between the cluster and, not that he can distinguish between the various kinds of palatal laterals. — Lfdder (talk) 14:41, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * He says he can assure us that 'it' is never alveolo-palatal. If the 'it' refers to [lj], I suspect there is a bit of miscommunication because I think Aeusoes1 means that he wouldn't be surprised if the /ʎ/ would be alveolo-palatal (even though the source doesn't actually say this). --JorisvS (talk) 14:55, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the "palatal" lateral seems to often actually be alveolo-palatal in a lot of Romance languages. Even if JMCF125 can distinguish between the two types (which would be impressive), I suspect their authority on generalizing for the whole language may be a little short. — Æµ§œš¹  [ãːɱ ˈfɹ̠ˤʷɪ̃ə̃nlɪ]  15:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

JMFC125 said right at the top that "ralho" has, so I don't think he's arguing that isn't alveolo-palatal. Distinguishing between and  doesn't sound very far-fetched to me. — Lfdder (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusion, what I meant is that [lj] is known to be different from [lʲ] among people with no phonetic background; and from the time I wrote it (the first paragraph, above) to today, I've been able to conduct a small survey and most people didn't even ever detect a similarity, while just a few others said right away there was some similarity, and none said there was a big similarity. I didn't make a survey with the unexistent absolutely palatal lateral approximant ([ʎ]), but I think they would say there would be a difference, as I had thought myself while learning some phonetician (note I have no academic degree on this, I just search the internet a lot). JMCF125 (talk) 13:41, 18 April 2013 (UTC)