# "cha" instead of "ca" in words like caméra, Carla, Canada. A Parisian French innovation?



## Nino83

Hello everyone.

I noticed that some French speaker pronounce the syllable "ca" like "cha", for example in words like _caméra, Canada_ and _Carla_.
I'd like to ask you what you hear in these samples.
I've asked this question in the French forum and a native speaker said that he hears [ka], and not [ʧa]

Here some example from Forvo.com:
spl0uf (Paris) Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni]
Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra [*ʧa*meˈʁa]

I noticed that some Swiss French speakers pronounce "ca" like "kja". It could be a former stage of this process.

Here an example:
Cistude (Switzerland) Canada, [*kja*naˈda]

What do you hear in these samples? A full velar [ka], a yod [kja] or an affricate [ʧa]?

Thank you


----------



## atcheque

Bonjour,

This site, Forvo: la guida alla pronuncia. Tutte le parole del mondo pronunciate dai madrelingua, doesn't seem relevant for French 
Moreover, it seems to me that you don't *h*ear the same as me. I don't *h*ear "tcha", but "ca" ("ka") for all those terms.


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> Moreover, it seems to me that you don't ear the same as me. I don't ear "tcha", but "ca" ("ka") for all those terms.


Hi, atcheque. 
So I presume that this is the normal way you pronounce the syllable "ca", seeing that you hear [ka].  
I've found another example in Swiss French. 
Cistude (Swiss) pronounces Canada, [*kja*naˈda]. Here the consonant is not yet palatalized and there is still a _yod_ between /k/ and /a/. Maybe this is the former stage of this process, which is more advanced in the Parisian area, where it reached the full affrication in some speakers.  
I'll ask this question in the EHL forum too, in order to know what other non-French members hear.  

Thank you for answering!


----------



## atcheque

Nino83 said:


> Cistude (Swiss) pronounces Canada, [*kja*naˈda].


 I agree it isn't a real [ka], I can *h*ear a slight palatalized a but not really [k*j*a].


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> I can ear a slight palatalized a but not really [k*j*a].


Letting apart Standard French, do you know of any dialectal variety of French where this happens?


----------



## atcheque

Nino83 said:


> do you know of any dialectal variety of French where this happens?


No. Italian-French?


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> No. Italian-French?


We have a clear difference between _c'è_, _che_ and _chi è venuto_ and the speakers who (seem to) have this palatalization come from the Parisian area. 
Thanks for your efforts.


----------



## atcheque

I rethink about and retry it.
For the best I can do [k-ha] which you may analyse as a slight *y*od (*edited).


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> For the best I can do [k-ha] which you may analyse as a slight jod.


Mh...when I hear English speakers pronouncing _Canada_ I hear [kʰa] while in spl0uf's and Kenji75018's speech I clearly hear [ca ̴  ʧa] and in Cistude's speech I clearly hear [kja ̴ kʲa].

(It was an English speaker from the US who asked me if I heard /karla/ in _Carla Bruni_ as pronounced by spl0uf)

Seeing that this change has just happened, historically (_cavallo > chaval > cheval_), I find interesting the fact that some speakers from Paris (which is the area where this change developed the first time in the past) show a similar feature in loanwords which have the syllable "ca".


----------



## Nino83

After this discussion, I went to Canepari's page where there is an article about French pronunciation where it is said:


> There are three (diphonic) pairs of phonemes: /p, b; t, d; k, g/, with important pairs of *taxophones*: [...] and *one* palatal, or rather, *postpalatal*, for /k, g/ *[c, ɟ]*, *before front vowels* (*including /a, œ/*)


 (page 8 or 158)

and about the Parisian accent:


> we must add that on an uneducated level, the *palatalization* of /t, d; k, g/ is *much more evident*, with articulations going from stops to *stopstrictives*, [ʦ, ʣ; *ʧ*, ʤ]


 (page 22 or 172)

Here other examples from spl0uf and leyania. I think the second speaker comes from Paris, because she has a final [ʦ] instead of [t] (typical of Paris, _tu_ [ʦy]) and a full affricate [ʧ].
spl0uf (Paris): cabane [*ca*ˈban] cabine de douche [*ʧa*ˌbin də̹ˈduʃ]
leyania (France, Swiss border):  cadette [*ʧa*ˈdɛ*ʦ*].

Anyway, I'm interested to know what you, non-French native speakers, hear in these samples. Do you hear velar, palatalized, affricate consonants?

Let me know!


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> For the best I can do [k-ha] which you may analyse as a slight jod.


Do you hear the same consonant in leyania's and gwen_bzh's pronunciation of cadette?


----------



## atcheque

No, not here.
Addition: Sorry, my idea was I *h*ear they prononce the same /ka/ but that is different from the previous examples /k-ha/.


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> No, not here.


Thanks. This is the difference I'm speaking about.
To you, are these two pronunciations, these two sounds, similar and acceptable or do you think they are two different consonants?


----------



## atcheque

I would accept (even not remark if not attentive) [k-ha] 
Not [kja] , not [ʧa]


----------



## Nino83

I'm sorry but I think I've not understood.
Do you think both pronunciations (leyania's and gwen_bzh's ones) are possible and acceptable in French? 
If you've to write down these two sounds, for example in a dictation, what would you write? Are these two sounds clearly "ca"? Would you write "ca", without mistaking it with another syllable?


----------



## atcheque

As I wrote, I don't *h*ear any "trouble" as you do Leyania's and gwen_bzh's ones are [ka].


atcheque said:


> I don't *h*ear "tcha", but "ca" ("ka") for all those terms.


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> As I wrote, I don't ear any "trouble" as you do Leyania's and gwen_bzh's ones are [ka].


Thank you very much, atcheque! 
Probably to you (and to other native speakers), [k, c, ʧ] are allophones before "a".


----------



## Oddmania

Nino83 said:


> Probably to you (and to other native speakers), [k, c, ʧ] are allophones before "a".


Je ne peux évidemment pas me prononcer à la place d'Atcheque, mais c'est extrêmement peu probable. Il y a quand même une très nette différence entre les mots _tchat _et '_catte_' (si le mot _catte _existait, bien sûr). Je n'ai jamais entendu qui que ce soit dire "Tchit Tchat" au lieu de "Kit Kat".

Tout comme Atcheque, j'entends quelque chose comme /k*ʰ*at/. Cela dit, c'est la même chose dans beaucoup de langue, y compris en anglais. Le mot _*cat*_ est généralement transcrit /kæt/ dans la plupart des dictionnaires, mais en phonétique plus rigoureuse, c'est bel et bien /k*ʰ*æt/. Ça ne signifie pas que le mot _cat _se prononce /kjæt/ ou /ʧæt/.


----------



## Nino83

I report here what I've found (and written in another thread).



> After this discussion, I went to Canepari's page where there is an article about French pronunciation where it is said:
> 
> There are three (diphonic) pairs of phonemes: /p, b; t, d; k, g/, with important pairs of *taxophones*: [...] and *one* palatal, or rather, *postpalatal*, for /k, g/ *[c, ɟ]*, *before front vowels* (*including /a, œ/*)
> (page 8 or 158)
> and about the Parisian accent:
> we must add that on an uneducated level, the *palatalization* of /t, d; k, g/ is *much more evident*, with articulations going from stops to *stopstrictives*, [ʦ, ʣ; ʧ, ʤ]
> (page 22 or 172)


It's not only my impression, but an established fact that there is some palatalization in French and that this is more accentuated in Paris.
It is similar to the historical change (that happened in Old French, but not in Occitan) _caballum _[ka] _> chaval _[ʧa] _> cheval_ [ʃə], that had the same "center" of propagation, i.e Paris.* 

*


----------



## petit1

I am not from Paris but from the West, nearly Southwest of France, and I pronounce "ca" exactly as people do in Paris and everywhere else, although I can't speak for the type of French spoken in some places, which seems to be influenced by hoarser foreign  languages.


----------



## Nino83

Oddmania said:


> Le mot _*cat*_


Yes, cat is [kʰæt] but spl0uf (Paris), Kenji75018, (Paris) and leyania (Swiss border) have [ʧa], not [kʰa] (this is what I hear).


petit1 said:


> and I pronounce "ca" exactly as people do in Paris and everywhere else


In fact leyania comes from South-East France (Swiss border), and she has an affricate consonant (like spl0uf from Paris).
@Oddmania @petit1
Atcheque said (see #10) that he didn't hear the same consonant in leyania's and gwen_bzh's pronunciation of cadette.
Do you hear that the syllable "ca" is pronounced in the same way by leyania and gwen_bzh?


----------



## atcheque

Nino83 said:


> Atcheque said (see #10) that he didn't hear the same consonant in leyania's and gwen_bzh's pronunciation of cadette.


Sorry, my idea was I *h*ear they prononce the same /ka/ but that is different from the previous examples /k-ha/.


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> Sorry, my idea was I ear they prononce the same /ka/ but that is different from the previous examples /k-ha/.


Ah, ok! I misunderstood. 
So, to you, leyania's and gwen_bzh's pronunciation of cadette is (more or less) identical.


----------



## petit1

For me the pronunciation of "ca" by the two people is the same but Leyania finishes the word with a "s" which doesn't exist.


----------



## Oddmania

Nino83 said:


> "We must add that on an uneducated level, the *palatalization* of /t, d; k, g/ is *much more evident*, with articulations going from stops to *stopstrictives*, [ʦ, ʣ; ʧ, ʤ]".
> (page 22 or 172)


Ce n'est pas ce que l'auteur a écrit.


> "The palatalization of */t, d; k, g/* is much more evident, with articulations going from stops to stopstrictives, *[tʂ, ɖʐ; ɡʝ, kç]*.


A aucun moment je ne comprends qu'il est question de remplacer la consonne *[k]* par* [tʃ]* ("tch") 



Nino83 said:


> Do you hear that the syllable "ca" is pronounced in the same way by leyania and gwen_bzh?


Oui. La seule différence, c'est le micro. C'est d'ailleurs pour cela que vous entendez peut-être /kadɛt*s*/. Le micro accentue les aigus, et le son [t] parait plus aigu qu'il ne l'est réellement. Évidemment, dans la vie de tous les jours, on se doute bien qu'elle ne rajoute pas un _s _à la fin de ses [t].


----------



## Nino83

Oddmania said:


> Ce n'est pas ce que l'auteur a écrit.


In CanIPA [kç] and [ɡʝ] are equivalent to the IPA [c ɟ] (see the table at page 16 or 96, here), i.e they are palatalized consonants. [kç] is the palatalized version of [k] towards [ç] while [tʃ] is the palatalized version of [k] towards [ʃ].
I can agree that the palatalized consonant I'm speaking about is [c] instead of [tʃ] (i.e a little back) but it is not, surely, [k] (to my hear).


petit1 said:


> For me the pronunciation of "ca" by the two people is the same but Leyania finishes the word with a "s" which doesn't exist.


This is the way I transcribed it in the other thread, i.e with a final [ʦ].


Nino83 said:


> leyania (France, Swiss border): cadette [ʧaˈdɛ*ʦ*].


----------



## Oddmania

Nino83 said:


> ...while [tʃ] is the palatalized version of [k] towards [ʃ].


D'après l'auteur, *[tʂ]* (ou, si vous préférez, *[tʃ]*.) serait une version palatalisée de la consonne *[t]*, mais pas de *[k]*. A aucun moment, il n'est dit que *[k]* se transforme en *[tʂ]*,  *[tʃ]*, ou "*tch*". Ce n'est d'ailleurs le cas dans aucun des enregistrements que vous avez postés jusqu'à présent.


----------



## Nawaq

K everywhere for me (I'm in the southwest)
I think that maybe Nino is listening to things too hard, there's really not "tch" anywhere.


----------



## nobbs

I see what Nino83 means - I am from Southern France and for me, the Parisian accent clearly has palatized k's. Closer to [kʃa] or [kʂa] than [tʃa], but somehow in between (not sure I'm correct in representing the sounds - I'm no phonetics expert)

EDIT: Sorry, replying based on general experience only - can't listen to the examples in the original post from this PC.


----------



## petit1

Nino83 said:


> cadette [ʧaˈdɛ*ʦ*]


No, no, she doesn't say[ ʧa] ! We all hear [ka] and Oddmania explained that the mike was responsible for the final "s"


----------



## Nino83

Oddmania said:


> *[tʂ]*


It is the same of the IPA [ts], a little, little bit more back. [tʂ] is [t] towards the Peninsular Spanish /s/, which is a bit more back than the French (English, ,Italian) /s/.
In order we have /ʦ/ like in _ca*ts*_ or in _*t*u_ (Quebec French, [ʦy]), /tʂ/ like in _*t*u_ (colloquial Parisian French, [tʂy], a bit more back, but it's still the consonant of _ca*ts*_, it's a /t + s/), then there is [tʃ] like in_ *ch*eese_ and _*c*ento_ (English, Italian, it is a palatalized [k], at least historically, _cheese < ċēse, cento < centum_ [ke]), a bit back there is [kç] or [c] like in the French _*c*améra, *c*adette_, and then there is [k] like in _cat, cavallo_.
The order is => ʦ tʂ tʃ kç/c k.
The French _ca_ is between the Italian and English _ca_ [ka] and the Italian and English _cia/cha _[tʃa], but in Paris it is a *bit* more fronted, just a bit more back than [tʃa] (i.e, it is nearer to [tʃa] than to [ka]).


nobbs said:


> I see what Nino83 means - I am from Southern France and for me, the Parisian accent clearly has palatized k's. Closer to [kʃa] or [kʂa] than [tʃa], but somehow in between


Thank you for the answer, nobbs.
This means that [ka] and [kça]/[ca] are not allophones for every French speaker, at least in Southern France.
Can I ask you which geographic area you come from? Is it Southern (coastal) Provence?


----------



## Nawaq

Nino83 said:


> The French _ca_ is between the Italian and English _ca_ [ka] and the Italian and English _cia/cha _[tʃa]



The French _ca_ is simply /ka/. It's just that in some pronunciations it isn't as "pure" as others, so maybe you think there's something added but really there isn't.


----------



## Nino83

Nawaq said:


> The French _ca_ is simply /ka/.


Here I don't agree.


Nawaq said:


> It's just that in some pronunciations it isn't as "pure" as others, so maybe you think there's something added but really there isn't.


Here I agree. The French _ca_ is variable, from [ka] to [ca].
This is the difference I hear between leyania's ([ca]) and gwen_bzh's ([ka]) pronunciation of cadette 
I hear [ca] also in spl0uf's (Paris) Carla Bruni (more fronted, [ca]) and Kenji75018's (Paris) caméra (more backed, between [ca] and [ka], similar to [kʲa]).


----------



## Nawaq

the two pronunciations (the _ca_ part at least) is the same for both (to me).
nope, really they're all /ka/ to me.


----------



## Oddmania

Wikipédia :


> Le français standard ne possède pas le [c]. On retrouve néanmoins ce son comme allophone de [k] *devant les voyelles antérieures (i, y, e, ø, ɛ et œ)* ou comme allophone de [t] devant le son _i._


Évidemment, les mots "Canada" et "cure", par exemple, ne se prononcent pas avec le même son. Lorsque je dis "Canada", ma bouche s'ouvre sur le côté et s'élargit. Quand je dis "cure", c'est l'inverse : mes lèvres s'arrondissent et ma bouche devient plus étroite. Si je positionne ma bouche pour prononcer "Canada" et que j'essaye de dire "cure" à la place, ça ne marche pas (et inversement). Cela vient uniquement du fait que la voyelle du mot "cure" est une voyelle arrondie. La consonne qui la précède s'en voit donc altérer.

Mais il n'est pas possible de prononcer les mots _Canada_, _Carla _ou _caméra _avec le [c] du mot _cure_. Ça ne fonctionne simplement pas. Votre perception de ce que vous croyez entendre est peut-être faussée par la qualité plus ou moins mauvaise des enregistrements.


----------



## Nino83

Oddmania said:


> *devant les voyelles antérieures (i, y, e, ø, ɛ et œ)*





Nino83 said:


> and *one* palatal, or rather, *postpalatal*, for /k, g/ *[c, ɟ]*, *before front vowels* (*including /a, œ/*)


This is the difference between the analysis of the French wikipedia page (without source) and that of Canepari, i.e the inclusion of /a/.


----------



## Nino83

Oddmania said:


> Le français standard ne possède pas le [c]. On retrouve néanmoins ce son comme allophone de [k] *devant les voyelles antérieures (i, y, e, ø, ɛ et œ)*


I've found another confirmation about the fact that the palatalization of [k] happens also before [a], in the English wikipedia, where the source is indicated:


> Some speakers pronounce /k/ and /ɡ/ as *[c]* and [ɟ] before /i, e, ɛ, *a*, ɛ̃/ and at the end of a word.[10]


Recasens, Daniel (2013), "On the articulatory classification of (alveolo)palatal consonants", _Journal of the International Phonetic Association_ *43* (1): 1–22
French phonology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Two different phoneticians (Canepari, Recansens) include the vowel /a/.


----------



## Dan2

Je suis en grande parti d'accord avec Nino.  Pour moi, le cas le plus clair c'est le "Carla Bruni" de spl0uf ici.  Si vous (les Français) considérez le premier son phonétique de cet enregistrement comme un [k] pur et simple (ou même [kʰ]), je crains que tout dialogue soit impossible.


----------



## Swatters

It's interesting to hear the opinion of non-native listeners about this. Palatalisation of /k/ before the high-front vowels is often mentioned, but the vast bulk of what I've read about palatalisation and affrication in Contemporary French is about the dental series, not the velar one. I found this, but they found much weaker effects before /a/ than before /i/.

For what it's worth, I have a palatal point of articulation for /ki - ky - ke/, but everything else remains (pre-)velar, even /kø/. At least as far as I can judge my own tongue position.



Dan2 said:


> Je suis en grande parti d'accord avec Nino.  Pour moi, le cas le plus clair c'est le "Carla Bruni" de spl0uf ici.  Si vous (les Français) considérez le premier son phonétique de cet enregistrement comme un [k] pur et simple (ou même [kʰ]), je crains que tout dialogue soit impossible.



Je le perçois comme /tʲa/, celui-là, si j'y prête vraiment attention.


----------



## Nino83

What I find interesting is that the only two native speakers of French who hear some palatalization are nobbs, from Southern France, and Swatters, from the Picard area. These are the two areas where the palatalization of "ca" in words like "cantar", didn't take place.
There is an interesting info in the Occitan Wikipedia.



> Aquel passatge vèrs cha e ja (o ia) se passèt a l'Auta Edat Mejana, avans la constitucion definitiva de la lenga occitana au sègle VIII. Segon lo lingüista Joan Pèire Chambon, aquel fenomèn apareguèt dins certans dialèctes dau latin tardiu, *centrats a l'entorn de la metropòli de Lion* (ven pas ges dau francés contrariament a çò que creson de personas mal informadas). Efectivament, Lion èra un centre culturau major a l'Antiquitat Tardiva e a l'Auta Edat Mejana. Aquela evolucion d'origina lionesa es restada en nòrd-occitan e maitot dins d'autres idiòmas romanics: lo francoprovençau (la lenga centrada a l'entorn de Lion), una granda part dau francés (*levat los dialèctes normand e picard*), lo friolan, lo ladin e una partida dau romanch.


Nòrd-occitan - Wikipèdia
The palatalization of [k] before [a] started from Lyon and spread throughout France except Southern Occitan (Languedocien, Guascon and Provençal), Normand and Picard.
Probably in these areas the pronunciation of "CA" remained fully velar and the Parisian pronunciation seems to these speakers palatalized while in the rest of France, the pronunciation is just palatalized, so many speaker can't hear the difference between [ka] and [ca].

This is only a speculation but it is curious that the only two French members who hear some palatalization come from these areas.


----------



## frugnaglio

Dan2 said:


> Je suis en grande parti d'accord avec Nino.  Pour moi, le cas le plus clair c'est le "Carla Bruni" de spl0uf ici.  Si vous (les Français) considérez le premier son phonétique de cet enregistrement comme un [k] pur et simple (ou même [kʰ]), je crains que tout dialogue soit impossible.





Pour moi c'est entre [cça] et [tʃa]. Sans doute affriqué, et décidément eloigné de [k]!
Les autres exemples soint moins extrêmes, mais _cabine de douche_ et le _cadette_ de leyania ont plus ou moins [cça]. Le _cadette_ de gwen_bzh par contre est peut-être [kha] avec un très léger .


----------



## nobbs

Am I allowed to post a Youtube link? Here is what I meant.
To Nino83: I'm indeed from the Gascon area. We pronounce [ka] with a very open mouth.


----------



## berndf

frugnaglio said:


> Pour moi c'est entre [cça] et [tʃa]. Sans doute affriqué, et décidément eloigné de [k]!
> Les autres exemples soint moins extrêmes, mais _cabine de douche_ et le _cadette_ de leyania ont plus ou moins [cça]. Le _cadette_ de gwen_bzh par contre est peut-être [kha] avec un très léger .



I agree with @atcheque . In that pronunciation of Canada there is a slight palatal off-glide of the initial [k] but calling it an affricate is exaggerated. I also agree with him that with regard to the other examples, you seem to (erroneously) perceive the aspiration, that exists as a frequent non-phonemic variant in all voiceless stops, as palatalisation. I have analysed the "Carla Bruni" example in a wave analyser and I am sure it is aspiration and not affricatisation. But I agree, the stop is not a /k/. It is an aspirated /t/. But that is peculiar to this one recording. Other recordings have an aspirated /k/.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you all for replying! 
So an English (Dan2) and two Italian (me, frugnaglio) speakers hear a [ʧ] in spl0uf's "Carla Bruni" and some palatalization, i.e [c] or [kç], in the other samples. Two phoneticians, one Italian (Canepari), one Catalan (Recasens), say that the French /k/ is often palatalized also before [a].
Among the French speakers, only two, one from Picardy and one from Southern France, hear some palatalization in spl0uf's "Carla Bruni" but don't perceive any palatalization in the other samples. The same (more or less) for Bernd, a German speaker.
The other French speakers don't perceive any palatalization.

There are many members who write in the EHL forum (Catalans, Romanians, Spaniards, Germans). It would be extremely interesting to know their opinion. I hope someone else will share his/her opinion with us.


----------



## Penyafort

Nino83 said:


> There are many members who write in the EHL forum (Catalans, Romanians, Spaniards, Germans). It would be extremely interesting to know their opinion. I hope someone else will share his/her opinion with us.



Here goes a Catalan's opinion then. 

I, too, hear palatalization in the example of Carla Bruni. In my opinion, though, it is not postalveolar, as the English unaspirated ch, or the Italian ci-, but rather alveolo-palatal, as in our Catalan _tx _[tɕ]_._

But I don't hear palatalization in the example of caméra. Rather some kind of aspiration, which could well just be the result of saying a stop too close to the mic.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> Two phoneticians, one Italian (Canepari), one Catalan (Recasens), say that the French /k/ is often palatalized also before [a].


Canepari speaks of a post-palatal realisation of /k/, which I do not contest. But this has absolutely nothing to do with "full affricate [ʧ]", neither with [t] nor with [ʃ] nor with the whole thing being a "full affricate". /ʧ/ and /k/ are separate phonemes and their separation is not the least bit compromised by this phenomenon.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> Yes, cat is [kʰæt] but spl0uf (Paris), Kenji75018, (Paris) and leyania (Swiss border) have [ʧa], not [kʰa] (this is what I hear).
> In fact leyania comes from South-East France (Swiss border), and she has an affricate consonant (like spl0uf from Paris).


It maybe important to note that "Parisian" pronunciation should not be understood as geographic, at least not only. It the the kind of uniform modern colloquial pronunciation you find especially with younger speakers throughout the country.


----------



## merquiades

In the Forvo examples I only here palatalization in the "Carla Bruni" example, but there is definitely some anomaly there.  I won't make a judgement as to why.  Maybe it is the microphone or the recording.  It should not be taken as a reference.
/Ka/ is pronounced /ka/, with a /k/ of greater or lesser intensity depending on the person and the context... I've never heard anything even remotely close to /ʧa/.  If someone pronounced it that way, it would be considered a terrible speech impediment.  _Tchanada, Thâlin, Tchadre, Tchafé, Tchar, Tchatolique_ would all be odd.

The only slight palatalization I have heard, and it is not typically Parisian either, is the /t/ and /d/ before frontal vowels especially /y/.  There can be a slight yod added between the dental consonant and the vowel.  In some speakers it is very noticeable but it's not /ts/.


----------



## Nino83

nobbs said:


> Am I allowed to post a Youtube link? Here is what I meant.
> To Nino83: I'm indeed from the Gascon area. We pronounce [ka] with a very open mouth.


Thank you for the video, nobbs! Yes, the sound at 20" is [ca]! This is the sound I perceive in the files I linked.


Penyafort said:


> I, too, hear palatalization in the example of Carla Bruni. In my opinion, though, it is not postalveolar, as the English unaspirated ch, or the Italian ci-, but rather alveolo-palatal, as in our Catalan _tx _[tɕ]_._



I agree with you. In the case of spl0uf's "Carla Bruni", the consonant is more fronted than [ca]. It's between [ca] and [ʧa].


berndf said:


> Canepari speaks of a post-palatal realisation of /k/, which I do not contest.


Which sound do you hear in the video linked by nobbs in #42 (le cours d'accent parisien TheLacuisine  from "Les sketchs à la con", youtube) at 20"?
I hear clearly [ca], which is neither the [ka] of _casa_ nor the [kʰæ] of _cat_ nor the [kʰa] of _car_. It is a palatal sound.


merquiades said:


> In the Forvo examples I only here palatalization in the "Carla Bruni" example


I notice that there is a general agreement on spl0uf's "Carla Bruni". Which sound do you hear in the video linked by nobbs in #42 at 20"? [ca] or [ka]?

It would be interesting to hear the opinion of @francisgranada. Seeing that in his mother tongue (Hungarian) [ca] and [ka] are different phonemes, I'm sure he could give us some interesting informations. 

This is a sample of the Hungarian [ca]/[cça]: atyám which is transcribed as [ɒ*ca*ːm]/[ɒ*cça*ːm].
It seems to me that the French sound is more fronted than the Hungarian one, comprised that present in the video that nobbs linked in #42.

Do you, French speakers, perceive a [ka] sound in the Hungarian word atyám?


----------



## merquiades

Nino83 said:


> I notice that there is a general agreement on spl0uf's "Carla Bruni". Which sound do you hear in the video linked by nobbs in #42 at 20"? [ca] or [ka]?


On commencera mardi après-midi par le "keu", qui est très important, "keu", "ka" voilà les choses qui résonnent et font vibrer le coeur des femmes.
The /k/ in the "keu" "ka" words are explosive like /kh/, probably explosive because he is giving such especially strong emphasis to these words. I don't really understand him here. Notice that when he doesn't give this strong accent to a word, the /k/ is normal and very understandable.
After listening many times, I think it could be "queue", "queue", "car" which would show his strange sense of humor and explain this video, but maybe not too....  If not I don't know....  His speech is affected, trying to poke fun, not so natural or serious.
I think you need to find audio material with someone with normal speech.


----------



## Nino83

@merquiades 
which sound do you hear in atyám? Does it sound like a [k] to you?


----------



## Nawaq

Nino83 said:


> Do you, French speakers, perceive a [ka] sound in the Hungarian word atyám?



No.
I think that people are really looking too much into it.
BTW like merquiades said that video isn't good at all, the man doesn't speak "normally", he put too much emphasize on the "keu", that's why it doesn't sound like a real /k/ to Nino -- it isn't natural.


----------



## atcheque

Nawaq said:


> No.
> I think that people are really looking too much into it.



 Now some are hearing [c] for [tj]


----------



## merquiades

Nino83 said:


> @merquiades
> which sound do you hear in atyám? Does it sound like a [k] to you?


Between /otjam/ and /oʧam/... It sounds to me similar to the Russian weak /t/ before /e, i, j/.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> *Which sound do you hear* in the video linked by nobbs in #42 (le cours d'accent parisien TheLacuisine from "Les sketchs à la con", youtube) at 20"?
> I hear clearly [ca], which is neither the [ka] of _casa_ nor the [kʰæ] of _cat_ nor the [kʰa] of _car_. It is a palatal sound.


As said:_ post-palatal_. I find this characterisation perfectly accurate. It is slightly more forward than [k] but not enough to warrant the description _palatal_.


----------



## Nino83

atcheque said:


> Now some are hearing [c] for [tj]


I'm pretty sure that I can't confuse [tj] of _*ti ha* detto_ [tjad'detto] with [c] of _*chia*vetta_ (which both happen in fast speech, [ti] > [tj], [kj] > [c]). 


berndf said:


> As said:_ post-palatal_.


Canepari uses the symbol [c] (palatal in both IPA and CanIPA). I hear [ca], even more fronted than the Hungarian [ca]. 


Nawaq said:


> that's why it doesn't sound like a real /k/ to Nino


It sounds palatalized to nobbs too.


----------



## Zec

Speaking of the original examples, I do hear a palatalized sound - but it only sounds affricated in "Carla Bruni". The word "atyám" sounds exactly what i imagined [c] to sound like compared to other [c]'s in other languages - to me, it sounds _more fronted_ than the french sound, which I agree to be post-palatal or pre-velar (to the extend these two overlap).

Based on my previous experiences with recording speech sounds (I did some experiments in Praat, and what was carefully produced as a pre-velar stop sounded quite affricated when listened to, exactly as the french example), i believe the affrication people hear is caused by the noise present in the recordings - the noise may fool the brain that the palatal stop is an affricate, since it resembles the fricative component of an affricate. Listening to higher quality recordings will help solve the issue.

On the other hand, I find it interesting that French is about to palatalize it's velars before "a" _again_.


----------



## Nino83

Zec said:


> Speaking of the original examples, I do hear a palatalized sound - but it only sounds affricated in "Carla Bruni". The word "atyám" sounds exactly what i imagined [c] to sound like compared to other [c]'s in other languages - to me, it sounds _more fronted_ than the french sound, which I agree to be post-palatal or pre-velar (to the extend these two overlap).


Thank you Zec!
At least, we agree that these sounds are neither [ka], nor [kʰa], i.e velar, but they are (post)palatal.
I'm conforted by the fact that those speakers who have some palatal consonant (stop or affricate) in their native language (Catalans, Croatians, Italians) hear some palatalization in the French _ca_ (some speakers, some samples, with some variation).


Zec said:


> On the other hand, I find it interesting that French is about to palatalize it's velars before "a" _again_.


Yes, it is interesting, seeing that historically it has just happened ([kanˈtaːre] _cantare_ > [ʧãⁿˈter] _chanter_ > [ʃɒ̃ˈte] _chanter_, or _chambre < camera_ (inherited) and _caméra < camera_ (learned)).


----------



## francisgranada

I'm reading this discussion for the first time and I haven't read all the posts, so I may have missed something important. However, the examples of Nino83 (ciao!) I hear as follows:

Carla: [ʧaʁla]  - perhaps not a "strong" [ʧ], rather something between the Polish _ć_ and _cz_
Canada:  [kjanaˈda] - a very "weak" [j] after [k], surely weaker than e.g. in Italian _chiamo_
Camera: [khameˈʁa] - a "weak" aspirate after [k], less strong than e.g. in English _cat. _But, curiously enough, the quality of what I hear depends also on the distance of my ear from the speaker: in this case I can find a position, where this [k] sounds more palatal to me, i.e. nearer to [ʧ] than to [kh] ...

Without knowing anything about the possible (regional or other) tendencies concerning the pronunciation of the initial _ca_ in French, my personal impression is that in case of _Canada_ and _Camera_ the "deviation" from the expected pronunciation is so little that it could be considered as being "within tolerance".

The pronunciation of _Carla Bruni_, instead, is surprising to me. It's clearly palatal - as if it were an erroneous "italianization" (hypercorrection) based on the French pronunciation of _Charles_.


----------



## Nino83

francisgranada said:


> However, the examples of Nino83 (ciao!) I hear as follows:


Ciao Francis, e grazie per la risposta. 
Which sound do you hear in the following pronunciations?
spl0uf: cabane, cabine de douche
leyania: cadette


----------



## francisgranada

*C*abane: [k]
*C*abin de douche: [ts] or between [ts] and the Polish _ć,_ or even near to some Northern Italian dialects, where e.g. _cento_ is prounouced almost as if it were written _zento_ (unvoiced _z_, of course, similar to the German pronuciation of the letter _z_)
*C*adette: more or less [ʧ]


----------



## Nino83

francisgranada said:


> *C*abane: [k]
> *C*abin de douche: between [ts] and the Polish ć_,_ or near to some Northern Italian dialects, where e.g. _cento_ is prounouced almost as if it were written _zento_ (unvoiced _z_, of course)
> *C*adette: more or less [ʧ]


Thank you!
Except for _*c*abane_ (where I hear a weak _j_, more or less something between [kʲ] and [cʲ]), I hear palatalized sounds in both _*c*abin de douche_ and _*c*adette_ too. 
If I were to rank these samples in order of palatalization, I'd say 1) Carla Bruni 2) cadette 3) cabin de douce 4) Canada 5) caméra 6) cabane.


----------



## francisgranada

Nino83 said:


> Thank you!


De nada , of course.

It is interesting that people do not hear the same ... Well, not only our ears do participate in hearing, but it's our brain that is probably even more responsible for the processes that lead to the result of what we think to "have heard" or to be the "truth" ... For example, I do perceive the difference between the Polish (and Eastern Slovakian dialectal) _ć, ś_ and the general Slavic _cz, sz_ (written _č, š_ in many Slavic languages; mea culpa that I don't know their exact IPA representation ....). However, e.g. a native Slovak from central Slovakia (or a native Hungarian and Italian, for example) would probably hear [ʧ] also in case of _ć, _because mentally he "has to decide" between  [ʧ] and [ts] - the nearest sounds he knows or he is used to hear ...

As to the French, if it is true that (the word initial) _ca_ is starting to be tendencially  pronounced with a "weak" postposed [j] or even like [ʧ], then we are witnesses of an initial phase of a phonetic process, namely a new palatalization. Typically, we are aware of these phenomena only when they are already "accomplished", so it may be interesting ...


----------



## Nino83

Yes, you're right Francis. This is the reason why the opinion of those speakers who have the palatal/velar opposition, like you, is interesting (in Italian [c] is only an allophone of [kj] and [kkj] in fast speech but, even if there is no phonemic opposition, when I hear [ca] I automatically associate the sound whit the diagraph "chia" [kja], and if it is more fronted, I associate it with "cia" [ʧa], so spl0uf's "Carla" sounded like "Ciarla" and "Canada" was similar to "Chianada").


----------



## francisgranada

Yes, but the consequences that you are able to make are not comparable with those of people that  have no experiences with languages (perhaps, except their mother tongue). In other words, I (being much less expert in phonetics than you, but used to different  "nuances" of pronunciation) also hear differently the "incriminated" word initial _ca_ in your examples - as if something were really happening in the French language. However, it's questionable if your observations are statistically sufficient for hypothetical conclusions of this kind  ... 

As to the proper process of _hearing_, it's an incredibly complicated/complex process ... For example, people that are constrained to use hearing aids, have big problems to use them, even though for a "laic" person a hearing aid seems to be a "simple amplifier". Well, I don't want to be  OT, so here I finish ...


----------



## Nino83

francisgranada said:


> However, it's a question if your observations are statistically sufficient for such a hypothetical conclusion ...


It seems that in Paris and in central France in general, this palatalization is more common. This, according to what phoneticians (like Canepari) say, but this was confirmed also by nobbs, from Southern France (Gascony)  in this thread. 
I don't know how much this phenomenon is widespread.


----------



## Swatters

Nino83 said:


> What I find interesting is that the only two native speakers of French who hear some palatalization are nobbs, from Southern France, and Swatters, from the Picard area. These are the two areas where the palatalization of "ca" in words like "cantar", didn't take place.



I wouldn't read too much into that, most of these samples I hear as (a sometimes very noisy) /ka/. The "Carla" bit is clearly exceptional. (The area I grew up in is right on the /ʧa/-/ka/ isogloss, but mostly on the affricate side)

I'll concur with some of the above comments about the danger of trusting the low-quality audio of Forvo too much. I find it hard enough to discriminate between aspiration, affrication and vowel devoicing (that last one is very frequent in French and might contribute to an impression of noisy releases) in good quality sample, with too much compression, they can all merge as "noise".



Nino83 said:


> This is a sample of the Hungarian [ca]/[cça]: atyám which is transcribed as [ɒ*ca*ːm]/[ɒ*cça*ːm].
> It seems to me that the French sound is more fronted than the Hungarian one, comprised that present in the video that nobbs linked in #42.



With French phonemes, I'd transcribe this as /ɔ.tjɛm/ with a very noisy transition after the stop.



Zec said:


> On the other hand, I find it interesting that French is about to palatalize it's velars before "a" _again_.



This might be diachronically stable or never go anywhere. Velar fronting is nothing new, 19th Century French nearly merged /kje ~ kjɛ/ and /ke ~ kɛ/ as [ce ~ cɛ] but this was reversed, leading to a frequent alternation between /ɛ̃kɛ/ and /ɛ̃kjɛ/ for _inquiet_, for example. The affrication of /t/ is clearly a change in progress in many varieties (although it might still get reversed), but I'm not sure you'd find a similar generational effect with /k/.


----------



## frugnaglio

berndf said:


> I agree with @atcheque . In that pronunciation of Canada there is a slight palatal off-glide of the initial [k] but calling it an affricate is exaggerated.


I said the one in Carla is an affricate, not the one in Canada.


berndf said:


> I also agree with him that with regard to the other examples, you seem to (erroneously) perceive the aspiration, that exists as a frequent non-phonemic variant in all voiceless stops, as palatalisation. I have analysed the "Carla Bruni" example in a wave analyser and I am sure it is aspiration and not affricatisation. But I agree, the stop is not a /k/. It is an aspirated /t/.


Wait, are you saying that the /k/ here is realized as an aspirated [t]...and also that there is no palatalization? You need HYPER-palatalization in order to go from k to t! It's all the way across the palate to the other side of the mouth (ok, a bit exaggerated, but from k to t is MORE than simple palatalization, which would yield [c]).


----------



## merquiades

Swatters said:


> The affrication of /t/ is clearly a change in progress in many varieties (although it might still get reversed), but I'm not sure you'd find a similar generational effect with /k/.



/tj/ is clearly widespread around here in the east where /i/ and /y/ are articulated with strong muscular tension.


----------



## berndf

frugnaglio said:


> I said the one in Carla is an affricate, not the one in Canada.


That could be. I responded only to what @atcheque wrote, I didn't mean to imply any reaction to your post.


frugnaglio said:


> Wait, are you saying that the /k/ here is realized as an aspirated [t]...and also that there is no palatalization? You need HYPER-palatalization in order to go from k to t! It's all the way across the palate to the other side of the mouth (ok, a bit exaggerated, but from k to t is MORE than simple palatalization, which would yield [c]).


The important thing is that I can't hear anything like an affricate.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> Canepari uses the symbol [c]


And he said this wasn't totally accurate ("palatal, or rather post-palatal").


Nawaq said:


> I think that people are really looking too much into it.


----------



## frugnaglio

francisgranada said:


> But, curiously enough, the quality of what I hear depends also on the distance of my ear from the speaker



I find that most of them sound slightly less fronted with headphones than with my laptop's speakers (which I was using the first time). _Carla_ is still very [tɕ]-ish though.



francisgranada said:


> It is interesting that people do not hear the same ... Well, not only our ears do participate in hearing, but it's our brain that is probably even more responsible for the processes that lead to the result of what we think to "have heard" or to be the "truth" ... For example, I do perceive the difference between the Polish (and Eastern Slovakian dialectal) _ć, ś_ and the general Slavic _cz, sz_ (written _č, š_ in many Slavic languages; mea culpa that I don't know their exact IPA representation ....). However, e.g. a native Slovak from central Slovakia (or a native Hungarian and Italian, for example) would probably hear [ʧ] also in case of _ć, _because mentally he "has to decide" between  [ʧ] and [ts] - the nearest sounds he knows or he is used to hear ...



Of course. The ć and č of Croatian are both [tʃ] to us and often transcribed _ch_ the English way. I have no idea what the difference is supposed to be!

Obviously the way we hear is conditioned by the way we are accustomed to recognize sounds (or stress position, or anything else). Hadn't I dabbled in Hungarian, it wouldn't have occurred to me to render it as [cça] and would have gone straight for [tʃa], probably.

Now, I find that his pronunciation of _Carla_ is quite natural *given his pronunciation of /a/*. If I try to pronounce /a/ the way he does, with that kind of timbre, my /k/ slips quite naturally forward to sound more like the sound he makes, simply because that /a/ is very fronted. I need to make a conscious effort to pronounce a back /k/ with his front /a/. My Italian /a/ is rather central, which automatically prevents me from pronouncing such a fronted /k/. So, I guess the quality of the speakers' /a/ here on the forum has some effect on how they perceive the /k/.


----------



## frugnaglio

berndf said:


> That could be. I responded only to what @atcheque wrote, I didn't mean to imply any reaction to your post.


Ah, ok. You wrote that after quoting my post so I thought it was a reply to me.


----------



## Nino83

berndf said:


> And he said this wasn't totally accurate ("palatal, or rather post-palatal").


Again, no. Canepari uses a stroked k (something similar to k̄ ) for pre-velars, i.e for the Italian "*chia*vetta" [k̄a]) and says that the French "ca" is more advanced than the Italian sound, i.e post-palatal, using a special symbol, similar to [c].
*Then* when he speaks about the Parisian and "Mediatic" pronunciation, he says that "the palatalization is *much more* evident" using the IPA and CanIPA symbol [c] (for the stop) [kç] for the affricate (which he calls stopstrictives). It can be a stop or an affricate, *but* it is *palatal* (not post-palatal).


berndf said:


> The important thing is that I can't hear anything like an affricate.


So, letting apart the dispute about affrication (Canepari says that they can be affricates or stops), these sounds are clearly palatal, at least in the most fronted pronunciations (spl0uf: cabine de douche, leyania: cadette) and almost post-alveolar, or pre-palatal, in spl0uf:  Carla Bruni.


Swatters said:


> I'll concur with some of the above comments about the danger of trusting the low-quality audio of Forvo too much.


Anyway, this particular effect (transforming aspiration into palatalization) happens only to the French "ca" and not to the much more aspirated English and German "ca/ka".
And if two Italians, a Croatian and a Hungarian perceive palatal (or post-alveolar or pre-palatal in some cases) sounds at least in "Carla Bruni", "cabine de douche" and "cadette" and a yod in "Canada", I think there is something more than a simple low quality in the reconrdings.


frugnaglio said:


> Now, I find that his pronunciation of _Carla_ is quite natural *given his pronunciation of /a/*.


Yes. Probably the vowel "a" is a bit more fronted in French than in other languages, but the interesting fact is that the Parisian /a/ doesn't seem to be much more fronted compared to the Southern French /a/.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> So, letting apart the dispute about affrication (Canepari says that they can be affricates or stops), these sounds are clearly palatal, at least in the most fronted pronunciations (spl0uf: cabine de douche, leyania: cadette)


I hear nothing even remotely palatal. For a German or English /k/ it would sound a bit strange but I can't hear anything but the ordinary French /k/, which is a bit bright for a velar but still clearly more velar than palatal. But then, I've been living in France and French speaking Switzerland for more then 25 years, so my perception may have adjusted and perhaps my vote can't fully count as non-French. You and I, we may simply hear the separation line between velar and palatal sounds at different points.


----------



## Zec

frugnaglio said:
			
		

> Of course. The ć and č of Croatian are both [tʃ] to us and often transcribed _ch_ the English way. I have no idea what the difference is supposed to be!



In the standard language, č is a slightly labialized, apical postalveolar or retroflex affricate (could be transcribed as [tʃʷ] or [ʈʂʷ] ), while ć is a laminal pre-palatal affricate (could be transcribed as [tɕ], even though it doesn't sound the same as Polish ć to me) - the tongue touches the alveolar ridge, but is shaped as when pronouncing true palatals like [j]. In some dialects it is a true palatal stop [c]. In others, both sounds merge into a sound quite similar to English or Italian [tʃ] - which causes a lot of spelling mistakes! I am familiar with all these pronunciations.

Back on topic, after further consideration of the sound examples, I have to agree with berndf - they are pre-velar stops. As frugnaglio already said, what makes them sound unusual, is that they are found before [a], while in other languages I'm familiar with (including my own), they are found only before i, and maybe also other true front vowels. I am still not sure what causes the "affrication" heard in "Carla Bruni" and "cadette" - aspiration, palatal coarticulation or just noise?




			
				Swatters said:
			
		

> This might be diachronically stable or never go anywhere. Velar fronting is nothing new, 19th Century French nearly merged /kje ~ kjɛ/ and /ke ~ kɛ/ as [ce ~ cɛ] but this was reversed, leading to a frequent alternation between /ɛ̃kɛ/ and /ɛ̃kjɛ/ for inquiet, for example. The affrication of /t/ is clearly a change in progress in many varieties (although it might still get reversed), but I'm not sure you'd find a similar generational effect with /k/.



Yes, this reminds us we have to be careful when predicting the outcome of sound changes in progress. Still, this contemporary allophony helps elucidate the historic process of palatalisation (lat. camera > fr. chambre). It shows a true [a] can induce palatalisation - which some historical linguists didn't consider likely (I remember reading a paper which discussed how it was possible for Latin "a" to palatalize velars in French. It included some rather complicated scenarios...)


----------



## francisgranada

Zec said:


> ... Still, this contemporary allophony helps elucidate the historic process of palatalisation (lat. camera > fr. chambre). It shows a true [a] can induce palatalisation - which some historical linguists didn't consider likely ...


Does this palatalization (Lat. _c _> French  _ch_) occur also in non word initial position? My idea is that if it happens/happened (at least originally) only in word initial positions, then the palatalization is not necessarily due to the following _a, _but it could be  caused,  let's say, by "the initial conditions", i.e. how the articulatory organs are "set" prior to the proper pronunciation.

This is only an ad hoc idea, plus I am not expert in phonetics/phonology, so I can't explain it better, but I mean something similar to what happens when you pronounce e.g. _vengo _in Spanish at the begging of the sentence. I.e. the letter _v_ is  pronounced [ b ] not because of the following vowel, but due to the prior position of your lips (they touch each other). In Spanish it is usual, but I noticed it sporadically also e.g. in spontaneous Italian pronunciation.


----------



## Zec

francisgranada said:
			
		

> Does this palatalization (Lat. _c _> French _ch_) occur also in non word initial position? My idea is that if it happens/happened (at least originally) only in word initial positions, then the palatalization is not necessarily due to the following _a, _but it could be caused, let's say, by "the initial conditions", i.e. how the articulatory organs are "set" prior to the proper pronunciation.



It occurs in all positions. The most obvious examples are modern French masculine / feminine adjective pairs such as blanc, blanche or franc, franche. There aren't many non-initial examples, since between vowels, palatalized c was lenited to [j] - compare ital. pacare, sp. pagar, fr. payer. So, palatalization itself is caused simply by the following [a]. Initial - non initial position related changes usually change the _manner_ of articulation (such is the difference between b and v), while palatalization is a change in the _place_ of articulation - [k], a back / velar sound becomes [ch], a front / palatal sound, by the influence of front / palatal vowels such as French [a].


----------



## francisgranada

Zec said:


> ... blanc, blanche or franc, franche....


Yes  ... Thanks for the interesting answer.


----------



## Nawaq

Ciao Nino,



Nino83 said:


> So, letting apart the dispute about affrication (Canepari says that they can be affricates or stops), these sounds are clearly palatal, at least in the most fronted pronunciations (spl0uf: cabine de douche, leyania: cadette) and almost post-alveolar, or pre-palatal, in spl0uf:  Carla Bruni.



You keep on basing yourself on these special recordings -- I'm sure that if I were to look, I'd be able to find other recordings -- that contradict you. Anyone can do that to prove any of their point.



Nino83 said:


> And if two Italians, a Croatian and a Hungarian perceive palatal (or post-alveolar or pre-palatal in some cases) sounds at least in "Carla Bruni", "cabine de douche" and "cadette" and a yod in "Canada", I think there is something more than a simple low quality in the reconrdings.



Again, on the same recordings. You seem to ignore (a bit, sorry if you don't) the opinion of people that think differently -- it's like you _have_ to hear something.

Really, I find phonetics interesting but this .... "obsession" (I can't think of another word right now, sorry people) is a bit weird (to me). I was thinking of doing a recording myself, but I fear the result (not good quality).


----------



## Nino83

I asked Luciano Canepari's opinion by mail (he was curteous and helpful, as always).
Here my question:


> Buon giorno, prof. Canepari.
> Ho letto con attenzione il capitolo sulla pronuncia francese presente sul suo sito e ho trovato interessante la parte relativa alle consonanti occlusive, in particolare alla palatalizzazione della “k” davanti alla “a”.
> Dopo aver ascoltato delle registrazioni su Forvo.com, volevo chiederle il suo parere.
> Nelle registrazioni seguenti sento dei suoni chiaramente palatali (o comunque seguiti da un piccolo yod /j/), e un suono post-alveolare in altri.
> spl0uf (Paris) Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni] cabane [*ca*ˈban] oppure [*kʲaˈ*ban] cabine de douche [*cʲa*ˌbin də̹ˈduʃ]
> Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra [*ca*meˈʁa] o [*kʲa*meˈʁa]
> Cistude Canada, [*kja*naˈda]
> leyania (France, Swiss border): cadette [*ʧa*ˈdɛ*ʦ*].
> Volevo chiederle se ci sento male io o se effettivamente questi suoni sono palatali e/o post-alveolari.
> Le chiedo ciò perché, parlando con persone di varie nazionalità, io, un altro italiano, un croato ed un ungherese (un americano ed un catalano, per quanto riguarda “Carla Bruni”) percepiamo suoni palatali e/o post-alveolari, mentre un tedesco (originario di Amburgo ma residente a Ginevra da tempo) e, ovviamente, quasi tutti i francesi dicono di non percepire alcun suono palatale, ritenendo che si tratti, in tutti i casi, di [ka] o al massimo di una leggera aspirazione, cioè [kʰa].
> Grazie mille e una buona estate
> Nino


Canepari's reply:


> Salve
> A, parte che, in Forvo, chiunque si può autoregistrare, senza garanzie...
> *Sono proprio palatali (occlusivi, o occlucostrittivi, tipo più mediatico)*. Quindi, la prima e ultima trascrizione non sono adeguate.
> Ovviamente, le varie opinini individuali sono deviate dalla non-conoscenza di fonetica vera, e influenzate dal sistema fonemico della propria lingua...


Translation:
Letting apart that in Forvo everybody can register himself, without guarantees...
*They are exactly palatals (occlusives, or stopstrictives, of the mediatic type)*. So, the first and last transcriptions are not adequate.

In other words, my first and last transcriptions, with [ʧa] (post-alveolar) are not appropriate but all these sounds are [ca] or [kça], i.e palatals.
For "mediatic type" he means the Parisian based pronunciation one can hear on the street or in TV channels.

If someone has some doubt, I can attach the stamp of the mail. 

Thank you all for joining this interesting discussion!


----------



## francisgranada

Nawaq said:


> ...  I'm sure that if I were to look, I'd be able to find other recordings -- that contradict you ...


I think I can agree with this, see my post post #59:


> ... my personal impression is that in case of _Canada_ and _Camera_ the "deviation" from the expected pronunciation is so little that it could be considered as being "within tolerance" ...


An example outside the French: there are some (few) people (I don't know the reason why) that tend to pronounce in Hungarian the unvoiced consonants with a "thin/weak" aspirate.  Now, in their pronunciation  the digraph_ ty_ in the word _atyám _(mentioned by Nino83 in his post #51) would sound very near to  [ʧ] instead of the standard clear [tj], corresponding e.g. to the Russian pronunciation of _ть_.  However, taking in consideration the statistical relevance, we  cannot speak about any "tendency" in Hungarian (at least, not now).

As to the observations of Nino83 and the present discussion, I find them interesting, because they do discover some "unexpected possibilities" in the  modern French, even though we do not know whether these phenomena are isolated or statistically irrelevant or if they really indicate the beginning of some kind of a sound-shift. Finally, phonetic changes do not happen during one night and at once in all the territory, where the given language is spoken ...


----------



## berndf

Nawaq said:


> Really, I find phonetics interesting but this .... "obsession" (I can't think of another word right now, sorry people) is a bit weird (to me). I was thinking of doing a recording myself, but I fear the result (not good quality).


_Making a mountain out of a molehill_ maybe the expression you are looking for. At least that's what I would say. But he is describing a genuine phenomenon.


----------



## Nawaq

berndf said:


> _Making a mountain out of a molehill_ maybe the expression you are looking for. At least that's what I would say. But he is describing a genuine phenomenon.



Yes, probably, thank you.
I'm sorry to Nino, if I sounded a bit harsh in my other posts -- it's just that I'm not an expert so all this "dissection" of a few samples seemed a bit... unusual to me, but like I said -- phonetics are really interesting -- also all the conversations that follows.


----------



## Nino83

berndf said:


> _Making a mountain out of a molehill_ maybe the expression you are looking for


I thought my question was clear when I said


Nino83 said:


> I noticed that *some French speakers* pronounce the syllable "ca" like


I also said that many other pronunciations sounded like [ka],for example


Nino83 said:


> Do you hear the same consonant in leyania's and gwen_bzh's pronunciation of cadette?





Nino83 said:


> This is the difference I hear between leyania's ([ca]) and gwen_bzh's ([ka]) pronunciation of cadette


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> I thought my question was clear when I said


I didn't mean it was not a "molehill" because so few speakers used this fronted /k/ (I think many do). I find it a "molehill" because the shift is so minute, especially if compared to a true palatalised /k/ as in "chat" as you initially did and which set off this discussion in a wrong direction, unfortunately. I hope this is all clarified now.


----------



## Nino83

Nawaq said:


> You keep on basing yourself on these special recordings


In Cistude's, cadeau, and spl0uf's, cagot, speech this [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa] is very frequent, and in these reconrdings the speaker is pronouncing the word in isolation, trying to pronounce it properly. Probably in casual speech the percentage of these palatal(ized) consonants could be even higher.
Other speakers, from the Parisian area, have this [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa].
Justyina (Paris) quatre, Pat91 (Paris) cahot
Spending only some minutes (not hours), I've found 6 speakers who have this palatal(ized) consonant before "a", spl0uf (Paris), Kenji75018 (Paris), Justyina (Paris), Pat91 (Paris), Cistude, leyania. They are trying to pronounce every word clearly and correctly, it's not casual speech.


berndf said:


> I find it a "molehill" because the shift is so minute, especially if compared to a true palatalised /k/ as in "chat" as you initially did and which set off this discussion in a wrong direction, unfortunately.


From the first comments (and just in the first one) I used many symbols, like [ʧa], [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa].


----------



## Nawaq

Nino83 said:


> In Cistude's, cadeau, and spl0uf's, cagot, speech this [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa] is very frequent, and in these reconrdings the speaker is pronouncing the word in isolation, trying to pronounce it properly. Probably in casual speech the percentage of these palatal(ized) consonants could be even higher.
> Other speakers, from the Parisian area, have this [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa].
> Justyina (Paris) quatre, Pat91 (Paris) cahot
> Spending only some minutes (not hours), I've found 6 speakers who have this palatal(ized) consonant before "a", spl0uf (Paris), Kenji75018 (Paris), Justyina (Paris), Pat91 (Paris), Cistude, leyania. They are trying to pronounce every word clearly and correctly, it's not casual speech.



Alright, you're the specialist, not me.


----------



## berndf

Nino83 said:


> From the first comments (and just in the first one) I used many symbols, like [ʧa], [ca] [cʲa] [kʲa].


You started your question like this:


Nino83 said:


> I noticed that some French speaker pronounce the syllable "ca" like "cha", for example in words like _caméra, Canada_ and _Carla_.


Implying that _cas_ and _chat_ could possibly be homophone. And that already derailed the discussion. But now it's all good.


----------



## Nino83

Nawaq said:


> Alright, you're the specialist, not me.


I'm simply an amateur. 


berndf said:


> Implying that _cas_ and _chat_ could possibly be homophone. And that already derailed the discussion. But now it's all good.


Thanks. 
Anyway, I'd like to remark that the most common pronunciation of "ca" in French is [ka] (velar or pre-velar). 
But when I heard that pronunciation of "Carla Bruni" (and other similar ones) I found it curious and then I started this thread. 
Thank you all again


----------



## Youngfun

I'd like to point out that Nino is not necessarily "listening hard", because for someone who's not a native speaker of French, those samples sound indeed different from [k].

I hear the same as Nino in these two words:
spl0uf (Paris) Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni]
Cistude (Switzerland) Canada, [*kja*naˈda]

But here I just hear a normal k sound:
Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra [*ka*meˈʁa]

I "listened hard" to the last one, but couldn't hear any [kj]. But then I'm even more biased than Nino: at least he has knowledge of phonetics while I don't. So it's possible that I don't hear any palatalisation because there's no [kʲ] in my native language.


----------



## Erkattäññe

Nino83 said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> I noticed that some French speaker pronounce the syllable "ca" like "cha", for example in words like _caméra, Canada_ and _Carla_.
> I'd like to ask you what you hear in these samples.
> I've asked this question in the French forum and a native speaker said that he hears [ka], and not [ʧa]
> 
> Here some example from Forvo.com:
> spl0uf (Paris) Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni]
> Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra [*ʧa*meˈʁa]
> 
> I noticed that some Swiss French speakers pronounce "ca" like "kja". It could be a former stage of this process.
> 
> Here an example:
> Cistude (Switzerland) Canada, [*kja*naˈda]
> 
> What do you hear in these samples? A full velar [ka], a yod [kja] or an affricate [ʧa]?
> 
> Thank you



Nino83, I'm a native spanish speaker, I hear the [c]s of the two first examples strongly palatalized, the first one the most, not a velar anymore for sure. 
Chilean spanish palatalizes velars before front vowels as in the Canada example but I often hear that phenomenon before /a/ too applied to /x/ which is written [j].


----------



## Sobakus

I mentioned this in the previous thread that touched on this topic:


Sobakus said:


> The answer is illustrated by modern French, where the neutral pronunciation of /k/ is palatalised, with the purely velar allophone appearing only before fully back vowels (it's very obvious when your language has an opposition of those).


The /k/ is _consistently_ palatalised both before and after front vowels: avec, duc, cœur. Before and after /a/, there seems to be some variation – from [c] to [k], but certainly far from [ʧ], which should properly be [tɕ]: this impression I attribute 100% to emphatic aspiration as in the linked video. I can reproduce this [tɕ]-like aspiration myself while pronouncing a [c], and I can testify that my speech organs' position is unquestionably different while the auditory difference is small, especially to someone whose language doesn't have the distinction. Still, it's clearly palatalised to some extent 8 times out of 10: sac, quatre. Even after /u/ it's palatalised with some speakers and not fully velar with others, palatalising if a front vowel follows: bouc. The /k/ seems to always be fully velar only before back vowels and before consonants (palatalised in _-rque, -sque_).

So, really, I think the question at this point should not be "why does /k/ palatalise before /a/" but "why does it not palatalise everywhere else" as, again, it seems that it's becoming the default realisation of /k/ if not followed by a consonant.


----------



## Nino83

Thank you very much, @Youngfun, @Erkattäññe, for answering.


Sobakus said:


> The /k/ seems to always be fully velar only before back vowels


I agree.


----------



## TitTornade

Youngfun said:


> I'd like to point out that Nino is not necessarily "listening hard", because for someone who's not a native speaker of French, those samples sound indeed different from [k].
> 
> I hear the same as Nino in these two words:
> spl0uf (Paris) Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni]
> Cistude (Switzerland) Canada, [*kja*naˈda]
> 
> But here I just hear a normal k sound:
> Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra [*ka*meˈʁa]
> 
> I "listened hard" to the last one, but couldn't hear any [kj]. But then I'm even more biased than Nino: at least he has knowledge of phonetics while I don't. So it's possible that I don't hear any palatalisation because there's no [kʲ] in my native language.



Hi,
I found it really amazing and funny that many of you can hear
spl0uf (Paris) saying Carla Bruni [*ʧa*ʁla bʁyˈni] with a [*ʧ*]
I can't hear an alveolar sound but surely a velar or palatal occlusiv... [*kj*] or [*c*]
The occlusion definitely doesn't happen in the alveolar zone.
To hear a [*ʧa*] in french with an alveolar occlusion, you have this tchatter

Anyway, to me, spl0uf seems to have a little "titi parisien" accent and a low quality microphone 


About Cistude (Switzerland) Canada, I hear [*ka*nada] with no [*kj*]
And
About Kenji75018, (Paris) caméra, I hear [*kha*meʁa] or [*kça*meʁa]


----------

