The LINGUIST List is dedicated to providing information on language and language analysis, and to providing the discipline of linguistics with the infrastructure necessary to function in the digital world. LINGUIST is a free resource, run by linguistics students and faculty, and supported primarily by your donations. Please support LINGUIST List during the 2017 Fund Drive (
Ask Your Question

is this a minimal pair?

asked 2015-08-25 08:47:11 -0400

bellz gravatar image

[kɨtʲ] and [kʲitʲ]

the diacritic at the top is "j" for palatalized. this diacritic is seen after "t" and the second "k". Does diacritics play a role in determining minimal pairs?

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete

2 answers

Sort by » oldest newest most voted

answered 2015-09-02 22:43:31 -0400

jonorthwash gravatar image

updated 2015-09-03 00:03:01 -0400

These might be minimal pairs in a language like Russian where the palatalisation of the consonant affects whether you have an [ɨ] sound or an [i] sound. For example, depending on how you analyse Russian, /bɪtʲ/ and /bʲɪtʲ/ are a minimal pair ("to be" and "to beat", respectively), and surface roughly as [bɨtʲ]/[bˠɨtʲ] and [bʲitʲ]. However, in Russian, velars are always phonologically palatal, so you don't get this sort of minimal pair with /k/ (though you do get the odd borrowed word, like /kɨɾgɨzˈstan/, though most Russian speakers still say /kʲiɾˈgʲizʲija/, or at best /kʲiɾgʲizˈstan/, because there's a problem with encoding a velar followed by [ɨ] in this analysis of how Russian works).

In any case, my point is that the question of whether two utterances form a minimal pair or not can only be answered in relation to a particular linguistic variety, so some clarification might be needed on your part depending on what sort of answer you're after.

edit flag offensive delete link more


You raise the good point that minimal pairs are usually talked about at the level of the (traditional generative phonology) underlying representation, not at the surface phonetic level.Thus, yes, if [i] vs. [ɨ] is allophonically conditioned by the [k] vs [kʲ] distinction, they may be minimal pairs.

usagi5886 gravatar imageusagi5886 ( 2015-09-02 23:30:18 -0400 )edit

Also, to answer the more specific question of whether diacritics play a role in determining minimal pairs, it again depends on the language. In Russian, before /ɪ/, /k/ and /kʲ/ don't contrast (though they do before e.g. /u/), but in some language they might.

jonorthwash gravatar imagejonorthwash ( 2015-09-03 00:06:06 -0400 )edit

answered 2015-08-27 21:24:57 -0400

usagi5886 gravatar image

So long as there is one difference distinguishing the two words, it qualifies as a minimal pair, regardless of whether it is transcribed in superscript / as a diacritic. (The distinction between a transcription of, say, [pʲa] and [pja] is generally at the level of phonological theory, not the surface phonetic facts.)

However, I notice your two words differ in two ways: not just [k] vs [kʲ] but also [i] vs. [ɨ]. As such, no, your words would be merely "near" minimal pairs and not true minimal pairs per se.

edit flag offensive delete link more
Login/Signup to Answer

Question Tools

1 follower


Asked: 2015-08-25 08:47:11 -0400

Seen: 385 times

Last updated: Sep 03 '15