Language /
The usage and future of the special Polish letters: ą, ć, ę, ł, ń, ó, ś, ż, ź (Polish language) [203]
I clicked on that international phonetic alphabet thing and frankly I don't understand most of the terms used there. I don't have sufficient knowledge to describe the difference, though I think this example would be kinda similar:
That's understandable, although I'd say it would take an average learner no more than a couple of weeks to study it and achieve a near expert understanding of what these signs mean and how they are to be used, along with some associated, practical examples. Not a rocket science at all.
So I don't know, maybe tygrys and także have the same soung, maybe it's an allophone of the same sound, maybe it's something different altogether.
That's more like a fair assessment I can can live with that.
There are indeed allophones of 'g' in Polish, some due to regional differences. However, this particular allophone (g', notice the apostrophe) does not apply here since were are talking about neither regionalisms nor about the influence of 'i' on palatalization of sounds in Polish.
pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatalizacja
I still find it amusing that instead of addressing a layman's argument in an area of your expertise (which should be very easy if you know your shit), the first thing you did was attacking them.
The issue was first raised by Lyzko and my initial post was in response to his. It is my understanding that Lyzko is either a linguist, or at least a person with a deep understanding of linguistics. Hence I used a phonetic transcript to show him his pronunciation was correct when it comes to the "g" sound.
In my later posts, I also explained the mechanics of upododobnienie wsteczne as it relates to this topic and I provided a link to a very simple text on the subject. In return I received an incorrect argument that I supposedly know Polish from books. Magdalena was addressed with similarly incorrect arguments. Were these not attacks based on a persons current geographic location?
It was not me, nor Madga who started the incompetence argument. It was Antek, whose idea of a competent speaker of Polish is the knowledge of a slangish expression, and this can be easily verified. What can be also easily verified is that you bet against Antek knowledge of a couple of expressions from Swiebodzin (incidentally, I lived not far from there). He lost because he didn't know the answer. According to his own definition of language competency he is incompetent in Polish, and he lives in Poland! How much worse can it be?
You can't have it both ways.
Apparently, Polish is my native language and when it comes to it, due to my academic background, I am more than qualified to debate its phonology, even if I don't know two or three exresssions teens in Swiebodzin, or Legia fans use. Both of you received plenty of uncomplicated explanations, from me and from Magda, as to what happens in speech. You even heard opinions of two other native speakers of Polish in this very thread.
Any additional links that are evidently over your heads were simply signs that there is nothing to hide and that there is a tremendous body of research and observations of the issue by many, including Polish linguists who live in Poland today.
I know it's hard to admit defeat. Not a biggie. Even if you haven't been able to learn a whole lot of linguistics, at least you received a brief refresher course in a tiny aspect of Polish phonology, and that living in Poland doesn't necessarily prove someone is a reliable source of information on the language when it comes to detail. Since my understanding is that Antek works with computers (development), I would assume he might be much more open to the idea of attention to detail which is as critical in computing as it is in linguistics. He may be satisfying this requirement in his field of expertise, but Polish phonology is not that field.
Above all, I hope you managed to learn that the study (stress of study, not prescribing of rules) of language is quite a bit more complex than initially meets the eye.
