ğ vs. għ

[pne]

Random linguistic observation on Turkish ğ and Maltese għ:

• In the written language, they are both represented by something based on the letter g
• They both used to stand for a [ɣ] sound (voiced velar fricative).*
• They are both no longer pronounced as a consonant in the standard language, but their presence lengthens adjacent vowels. Some (rural?) dialects still pronounce this sound as a consonant, though.

I find it interesting that they share those similarities.

* Maltese għ derives from two Arabic sounds: `ayn/ʕayn ع and ghayn/ġayn غ, only the second of which is a voiced velar fricative. (The first is a voiced pharyngeal fricative.) However, the (reflexes of the) two sounds merged in standard Maltese, though I believe there are (or at least, used to be not that long ago) dialects which preserve the distinction and not only pronounce għajn but pronounce it differently depending on whether it's a reflex of `ayn or ghayn.

Comments

[allegrox.livejournal.com]

In all of those ways, they share an interesting similarity with English gh. I wonder if anything like this happens in other languages as well.

[elgrande.livejournal.com]

"gh" was an unvoiced velar fricative [x], though, wasn't it?

[allegrox.livejournal.com]

"gh" usually replaced the letter "yogh" (Ȝ,ȝ, rightly spelled Ȝoȝ), which varied in pronunciation, usually representing [j] and [ɣ]. In Anglo-Saxon, these had all been spelled with "g", and the pronunciation was determined by context, until the sound changes that brought about Middle English. For ease of reading, many Anglo-Saxon scholars use a dotted "g" (ġ). I don't think it was ever unvoiced, though.

"gh" as [x]

[elgrande.livejournal.com]

Perhaps we're talking about different periods of the history of the English language.
According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_English_language, [x] (an unvoiced velar fricative) written as gh was lost between 1400–1600. And that's what I've read often before, that "gh" used to be [x] _at some point_.

(That "gh" ought to be [x] has always sorta made sense to me because words with "gh" tend to have "ch" ([x] or [C], both phonemically /x/) in German (laugh = lachen, daughter = Tochter, night = Nacht, thought = dachte etc.) That's why I found it very interesting when I read that "gh" actually used to be [x]. Also Scots still has this sound in at least some of the words I just mentioned: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_language .)

Re: "gh" as [x]

[allegrox.livejournal.com]

Oh, I guess you're right. I do remember reading that it was [x] in Middle English. Maybe it was [ɣ] earlier. Also note that in English it usually remains only after "ou" (or "au" as in "laugh") and before "t", where it might have been pronounced differently than in other positions.