Talk:ហ្វឹក

(Notifying Stephen G. Brown, Wyang, Octahedron80): : Hi all. I've got two questions: What's the Thai source and are all four pronunciations valid per Sealang or do you think it's a mistake/mistransliteration? See also Talk:ហ្វៃហ្វា where it was mentioned. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 04:54, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev Octahedron80 has added the Thai etymology. (I still remember the laughter in the classroom when learning the word ฝึกหัด (fʉ̀k-hàt, “to drill; to practice; to train”), hehe.) I don't know the answer to the second question. It could be the case that Headley 1977 /ʋɨk/ ~ /fɨk/ was based on Chuon Nath 1967, which had the respelling ហ្វ៊ឹក (fɨk) /fɨk/, and that he rectified it to the (more common?) spelling pronunciation /fək/ ~ /ʋək/ in the 1997 edition. Wyang (talk) 06:44, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Atitarev, ហ្វឹក (vək) has only two pronunciations: either ʋɨk/fɨk or ʋək/fək. It's just two different systems for describing the vowel. —Stephen ^(Talk) 02:54, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

@Stephen G. Brown: Thanks. Yes, we suspect these could be two different transliterations methods of the same vowel but one of them could be wrong because we stick to just one system.

Both ʋ- and f- readings are possible but it's not clear, which vowels are correct. /ɨ/ and /ə/ are different vowels and both are currently used (Khmer_language#Phonology).

Since "វ" (v) and the digraph "ហ្វ" (f) belong to different classes/series, their default readings (without diacritics to convert to a different class) are different. "វឹក" gives "vɨk" and "ហ្វឹក" gives "fək". To get "vək" and "fɨk" I used respellings with diacritics in the template "វ៉ឹក" and "ហ្វ៊ឹក": {{km-IPA|វឹក|ហ្វ៊ឹក|ហ្វឹក|វ៉ឹក}}. If one pair is considered incorrect, I will remove it. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:10, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Maybe all readings are valid but they differ in frequency/currency. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 03:11, 17 March 2018 (UTC)