Thread: Confused about soft vowels

I learned that the Russian vowels е, ё, ю and я have a distinct y-sound at the beginning of a word and after another vowel.

At first I thought this meant that there's no "y" sound after a consonant, especially after a native speaker told me that "медленно" is pronounced "MEHD-lee-nah". However, it seems that in all the pronunciation guides, the "y" sound is included even after consonants.

Is this because a soft consonant, when pronounced correctly, naturally provides the "y" sound?

Originally Posted by rebmaboss

I learned that the Russian vowels е, ё, ю and я have a distinct y-sound at the beginning of a word and after another vowel.

At first I thought this meant that there's no "y" sound after a consonant, especially after a native speaker told me that "медленно" is pronounced "MEHD-lee-nah". However, it seems that in all the pronunciation guides, the "y" sound is included even after consonants.

Is this because a soft consonant, when pronounced correctly, naturally provides the "y" sound?

It is because that is how the untrained ear of non-natives hears soft consonants

In fact, медленно does not have any "y" sound! But "м" and "л" are palatalized: ['m^je-dl^jɪ-nnə], where both [m^j] and [l^j] are palatalized ("soft") consonants. A soft consonant is a single sound, it does not really contain "y", but it is pronounced with the middle part of the tongue raised towards the front palate (during all the time of its pronunciation, not just at the end phase!).

For more details, see hear:
Russian phonology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The contrast between palatalized and unpalatalized consonants is important in Russian, but English lacks this feature entirely.

Originally Posted by Боб Уайтман

It is because that is how the untrained ear of non-natives hears soft consonants

In fact, медленно does not have any "y" sound! But "м" and "л" are palatalized: ['m^je-dl^jɪ-nnə], where both [m^j] and [l^j] are palatalized ("soft") consonants. A soft consonant is a single sound, it does not really contain "y", but it is pronounced with the middle part of the tongue raised towards the front palate (during all the time of its pronunciation, not just at the end phase!).

For more details, see hear:
Russian phonology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The contrast between palatalized and unpalatalized consonants is important in Russian, but English lacks this feature entirely.

That makes sense. So, with palatalization, "ся" is pronounced "ca", and те is pronounced "te", right? Not "cya" and "tye"?

Originally Posted by rebmaboss

That makes sense. So, with palatalization, "ся" is pronounced "ca", and те is pronounced "te", right? Not "cya" and "tye"?

Noooo! "Ся" and "ca" are pronounced differently. You may say, that "ca" + palatalization = "cя", and vice versa, "ся" without palatalization = "са".

It's important to understand, that there's no such thing as soft vowels, but there are soft and hard consonants, and that most Russian consonants can be either hard or soft, depending on the following vowel. It' crucial for correct pronunciation.

Check these two topics. There are explanations on a similar issue and helpful videos.
What is and what is not important in Russian pronunciation
Confused over "e" in these words

However, it seems that in all the pronunciation guides, the "y" sound is included even after consonants.

All those "guides" must be burnt, because they mislead learners. The pronunciation of a hard consonant and "y" instead of a soft consonant is a typical mistake. lya will be written лъя, in fact.

Many Russian consonants come in "hard"/"soft" pairs, and the quality is expressed in print by the letter used to represent the vowel. That is, the letters in these pairs a/я, э/е, о/ё, у/ю are all pronounced the same! (the pair ы/и is a slightly different issue). It is the preceding consonant that is pronounced differently. Except for word-initial position, where both members of the pairs can occur, in which case you get the "y-glide" as in English "yet" occurring before the "soft" member of the pair (the second one in my examples). So the word for Christmas tree ёлка is phonemically represented with this y-glide (a semivowel) as /jólka/, but the word тёлка has an initial palatalized ("soft") consonant: /t'о́lka/

Just to make it clearer. There are 4 possibilities:

са [sa] - hard s + ah
ся [s^ja] - soft s + ah
съя [sja] - hard s + y + ah
сья [s^jja] - soft s + y + ah

The IPA symbol of [j] stands for the English "y" sound in "yes", [s^j] stands for the palatalized [s] (a single sound!).

All the four syllables above are pronounced differently.
But the difference between the latter two (съя and сья) is never used to distinguish between different words, although the difference is still noticeable.

Originally Posted by Боб Уайтман

Just to make it clearer. There are 4 possibilities:

са [sa] - hard s + ah
ся [s^ja] - soft s + ah
съя [sja] - hard s + y + ah
сья [s^jja] - soft s + y + ah

The IPA symbol of [j] stands for the English "y" sound in "yes", [s^j] stands for the palatalized [s] (a single sound!).

All the four syllables above are pronounced differently.
But the difference between the latter two (съя and сья) is never used to distinguish between different words, although the difference is still noticeable.

What a perfect summary! Just what I needed!

Wow, I guess Russian isn't as hard as english after all

Originally Posted by Боб Уайтман

Just to make it clearer. There are 4 possibilities:

са [sa] - hard s + ah
ся [s^ja] - soft s + ah
съя [sja] - hard s + y + ah
сья [s^jja] - soft s + y + ah

The IPA symbol of [j] stands for the English "y" sound in "yes", [s^j] stands for the palatalized [s] (a single sound!).

All the four syllables above are pronounced differently.
But the difference between the latter two (съя and сья) is never used to distinguish between different words, although the difference is still noticeable.

I wonder why many textbooks fail to explain that.

Originally Posted by Marcus

I wonder why many textbooks fail to explain that.

Most anglo beginners will struggle to hear or even understand the distinctions between soft and hard consonants, let alone be able to reproduce them, and in the meantime explaining "ся" as "s + ya" gives a good enough approximation of the correct sound to get by on.

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

Most anglo beginners will struggle to hear or even understand the distinctions between soft and hard consonants, let alone be able to reproduce them, and in the meantime explaining "ся" as "s + ya" gives a good enough approximation of the correct sound to get by on.

No, it doesn't. It is absolutely wrong. Sya and ся are as similar as w and v in English. If it is difficult to hear and understand, it must be properly explained and emphasized.
These are all PHONEMIC distinctions which are represented by Russian orthography. When we studied English, we used to write phonemic transcriptions in the IPA. We did not hear the difference between many English sounds, especially vowels, but we were taught that there were different sounds.
Replacing soft consonants with a consonant + yot is not an approximation at all for a Russian ear. Saying lya instead of ля is worse than saying la with hard L. Georgian accent with their нэт sounds better. Such explanations do not allow to understand the meaning of the disjunctive signs, how to pronounce soft consonants at the end of a syllable, give wrong and simulteniously difficult pronunciation.
In this case it is really better to pronounce са in reflexive verbs because such pronunciation exists.
And it is very difficult to correct then, because the pronunciation must be established at the first stages of language learning and because people say: "It was written in textbooks".
It is a comon mistake made by anglophones to say a consonant + y instead of a soft consonant, because to an untrained English ear it can sometimes really sound like that. But textbooks should pay attention at it and say that students should avoid this pronunciation.
The words лёд and льёт differ by the presence of this "y" sound, they are [l'ot] and [l'jot]. Do you know how Russians pronounce the word "word"? вёрд. Does it sound similar? No. But that's how "nyedyelya" sounds to a Russian, with the same degree of accuracy.

I'm not arguing the toss one way or the other, I was just pointing out the justification for glossing over that aspect of the language in beginner texts.

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

I'm not arguing the toss one way or the other, I was just pointing out the justification for glossing over that aspect of the language in beginner texts.

Entirely wrong expalanations cannot be justified, because they do not help but make big harm to a language learner. I explained why. It is difficult to understand for a native English speaker that replacing a soft consonant with a consonant (usually hard) is not an approximation, that's just a replacement of one sound with two different. Like w is v and oo pronounced simulteniously, lets approximate w like voo. Or English th in think is f and s pronounced simulteniously, lets say fs instead of th - fsink.

Originally Posted by Marcus

Entirely wrong expalanations cannot be justified, because they do not help but make big harm to a language learner. I explained why. It is difficult to understand for a native English speaker that replacing a soft consonant with a consonant (usually hard) is not an approximation, that's just a replacement of one sound with two different. Like w is v and oo pronounced simulteniously, lets approximate w like voo. Or English th in think is f and s pronounced simulteniously, lets say fs instead of th - fsink.

Don't forget that English in Russia is a widespread academic subject which most learners begin in school, so beginner English texts in Russia are introductory-level academic works. In contrast, academic Russian is virtually unheard-of in anglo countries and the overwhelming majority of Russian-learners are teaching themselves in their own time, and so beginner Russian texts are more like hobby or self-help books than academic textbooks.

There is a world of difference between learning a language as an academic subject and learning a language to "get by" conversationally. Different motivations, different market, different approach.

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

Don't forget that English in Russia is a widespread academic subject which most learners begin in school, so beginner English texts in Russia are introductory-level academic works. In contrast, academic Russian is virtually unheard-of in anglo countries and the overwhelming majority of Russian-learners are teaching themselves in their own time, and so beginner Russian texts are more like hobby or self-help books than academic textbooks.

There is a world of difference between learning a language as an academic subject and learning a language to "get by" conversationally. Different motivations, different market, different approach.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I'm hoping to be in Russia long-term, which is why I wanted to know precisely how to pronounce things. But some people just want to take a short trip to Russia, so they want to learn just enough to communicate. If they speak slowly, Russians will understand them based on context, just like we in America still understand people who speak poor English.

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

Don't forget that English in Russia is a widespread academic subject which most learners begin in school, so beginner English texts in Russia are introductory-level academic works. In contrast, academic Russian is virtually unheard-of in anglo countries and the overwhelming majority of Russian-learners are teaching themselves in their own time, and so beginner Russian texts are more like hobby or self-help books than academic textbooks.

There is a world of difference between learning a language as an academic subject and learning a language to "get by" conversationally. Different motivations, different market, different approach.

Russian with English sounds is practically incomprehensible, and you have to understand native speakers as well. Just think of a Russian saying vafe instead of wave, debt instead of dad, вёрт instead of word, will he be always understood?
These books do not help, they only make harm. you have seen yourself: Боб Уайтман's table helped a learner more than many textbooks, and Bob managed to write it even not being a professional Russian as a second language teacher, as far as I understand.
It is for a learner to decide what is important for him and what is not, textbooks must say correct things. Why should be the pronunciation fully negected and the grammar be studied if Russian is a living language?
And it is still difficult to pronounce Russian words in this way. For example there is no "ly" in English, so it is not easy to pronounce such a combination of sounds especially after consonants. What for should they make effort to get wrong pronunciation if they can make effort to get the correct one? Russian soft L is very close (close enough for practical purposes) to the French or the German L. Does anyone hear the German or French L as ly?

Originally Posted by zedeeyen

Don't forget that English in Russia is a widespread academic subject which most learners begin in school, so beginner English texts in Russia are introductory-level academic works. In contrast, academic Russian is virtually unheard-of in anglo countries

That's a bit of an exaggeration. I think it's much closer to the truth to say that academic Russian at "pre-college" ages is virtually unheard of, at least in the States. I mean, the vast majority of public high-schools in the US offer only Spanish and perhaps French as a foreign-language, and Spanish is the only language that is likely to be taught (at a very basic level) in public elementary schools. So very very very few Americans entering a first-year college Russian course would have had ANY previous exposure to the language.

At the university level (in my own experience), Russian is taught in a highly structured and formalized way, utterly unlike the Pimsleur/Rosetta approach.

In my first-year course, the concepts of "hard" and "soft" consonants were introduced extremely early, at the same time as students are learning the alphabet, and about аканье, and about voiced/voiceless consonant pairs, etc. In other words, it was all presented as part of a systematic introduction to Cyrillic orthography.

Still, I didn't start to really "internalize" the principles of Russian pronunciation (in a non-abstract way) until my third year, partly because the focus for the first two years was overwhelmingly on written Russian and its grammar. (It was also partly because I was too lazy/busy to spend hours listening to audiotapes in the university "language lab" -- we weren't required to attend the lab; our course grades for the first two years were based almost entirely on written examinations, not oral ones; and I was double-majoring in Biology, so I had lots of other work to fill my time!)

I should add that some of the students in my first-year Russian class had no previous foreign-language study at all, and many had only studied Spanish or French, with their inflections that are overall much simpler than in Russian. (I had an advantage because in high school I'd studied Latin, which is even more heavily inflected than Russian -- so I was already painfully familiar with the concept of case-declension, for example.)

P.S. Even if I'd spent more time with the audiotapes, learning to pronounce the hard/soft consonants correctly would have still been an uphill climb for me, for the reason already pointed out by many people: these sounds aren't phonemically distinct in English, and the whole concept is a bit alien for us. But I might have learned it a little sooner.

By the way, during my entire formal education, we were never taught the IPA -- our Russian textbooks, for example, used variants of the United Nations / Library of Congress standards for Latinizing Cyrillic. As far as I know, the IPA is mainly taught in "general linguistics" courses, so that students can compare the sounds of different languages, but when you're focusing on ONE foreign language, using the IPA doesn't seem like a great advantage.

I mean, for example, ы will inevitably be a difficult sound for English speakers beginning in Russian, and it doesn't make the slightest difference whether you transliterate it as ɨ (IPA) or y (Library of Congress).

Originally Posted by Throbert McGee

In my first-year course, the concepts of "hard" and "soft" consonants were introduced extremely early, at the same time as students are learning the alphabet, and about аканье, and about voiced/voiceless consonant pairs, etc. In other words, it was all presented as part of a systematic introduction to Cyrillic orthography.

This is definitely not comparable. Soft/hard consonants are MUCH more important than the "аканье". It is pity that they are taught as if they were of the same level of importance. If you do not distinguish between soft and hard consonants you simply do not speak correct Russian. Note a Russian that when talking over a bad phone line when trying to speak a word distinguishably will pronounce it with exact vowels, without the "akanie".

I'd much rather learn it right the first time, and not 'un-learn' improper pronunciation. The books I've been using stressed the points Marcus has been making from the beginning, with exercises parallel to what Боб Уайтман has shown, with audio to drive it home. But then I've been using books written by Russians. Shop around.